Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42877064›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

From direct scoring to cue integration: big five prediction from spoken responses to a picture-based self-projection task.

Qifan Yang, Jian Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Qifan YangFaculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Jian LiFaculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Open-ended language tasks are increasingly used in personality assessment, but their psychometric value largely depends on two factors: the type of evidence a task elicits and how that evidence is represented before scoring. Methods: In this study, we examined five spoken responses to a picture-based self-projection task collected from 374 participants during in-person workplace training sessions. Participants first completed the Big Five Inventory-2 questionnaire; the spoken task was administered approximately 1 day later, and responses were transcribed using a Whisper-based automatic speech recognition pipeline. We compared four approaches applied to the same transcribed corpus: Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (a lexical dictionary method), contextual semantic embeddings, holistic large language model (LLM) appraisal (holistic appraisal route; HAR), and hierarchical cue integration route (HCIR). Results: The results were trait-specific: extraversion was the most recoverable domain across methods, whereas Openness was the least recoverable. HAR preserved rank-order information, particularly for Extraversion, but exhibited poor calibration, evidenced by negative mean Discussion: We refrain from attributing this pattern solely to cue integration, however, as HCIR included a supervised calibration stage that HAR lacked; the comparison therefore reflects the joint contribution of cue organization and supervised calibration. By explicitly organizing cue provenance, self-relevance, quality indicators, and trait-specific evidence before supervised calibration, HCIR supports a measurement-oriented interpretation of LLM-assisted personality inference from spoken responses that combine self-projection, preference, and normative evaluation.

Indexed as

big five personalitycue integrationLLM-assisted measurementpicture-based self-projection taskspoken responsestrait recoverability

Identifiers

PMID42877064
PMCPMC13662918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.