ArticleScientific reports2026
The AI interviewer: multi-faceted evaluation of adaptive questioning by large language models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large language models are increasingly deployed as adaptive interviewers in qualitative research and human-computer interaction, yet systematic evaluation of their interviewing behavior remains limited. We introduce a modular LLM agent for conducting semi-structured psychological interviews and present a controlled, multi-faceted evaluation protocol to assess interviewer quality across six state-of-the-art models: Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-5 Chat, Grok 4, Qwen3-235B A22B, and DeepSeek Chat V3.1. The agent conducts adaptive interviews over 54 main questions spanning biography, family, interests, challenges, values, work, and health, deciding for each response whether a follow-up is warranted and generating tailored follow-up questions. To enable fair comparison, we standardize interview context using transcripts from ten baseline human interviews, execute all models under identical orchestration and prompts, and use a single LLM interviewee to eliminate human response variability. Expert psycholinguists evaluate interviewer behavior on five binary criteria: benevolence (empathic tone), necessity, context-awareness, openness, and justified skip (when follow-ups are unnecessary), annotating over 2900 items with high inter-rater reliability (Fleiss κ 0.67-0.93). We complement human judgment with efficiency metrics (latency, questioning intensity) and linguistic profiling via morpho-syntactic and psycholinguistic features on the interview text. Results reveal systematic trade-offs: Gemini 2.5 Pro has the most empathic tone, GPT-5 Chat optimizes for speed and selective precision, Grok 4 achieves exhaustive coverage at the cost of latency and occasional over-contextualization, while Claude Sonnet 4 offers balanced versatility. Linguistic markers such as person pronouns, tense, intensifiers, or syntactic complexity align meaningfully with human judgments, suggesting that stylistic choices are aligned with perceived interview quality. DeepSeek's format instability underscores the operational importance of schema compliance. Our reusable toolkit (prompts, orchestration code, annotation rubric) provides a foundation for principled deployment of LLM interviewers in psychological experiments, enabling researchers to match model capabilities to study goals and to audit agent behavior for empathy, appropriateness, and effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.