ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Personality Inference From Semistructured Interviews Using Large Language Models: Comparative Evaluation Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Personality traits are central to understanding human behavior and life outcomes, yet their assessment remains challenging due to biases and limited expressiveness in traditional self-report inventories. The emergence of large language models (LLMs) creates new opportunities to infer personality from naturalistic text, but it remains unclear whether these systems can reliably predict validated personality traits or whether their predictions primarily reflect superficial linguistic patterns. Objective: This study evaluates the ability of LLM-based methods to predict continuous Big Five personality scores (1-5 Likert scale) from semistructured interview transcripts and compares the performance of different modeling paradigms. Methods: We analyzed semistructured interview transcripts from 518 participants, each paired with validated self-reported Big Five scores measured using the 10-item Big Five Inventory (BFI-10). We compared four paradigms: (1) zero-shot and chain-of-thought prompting with GPT-5 mini; (2) parameter-efficient fine-tuning (low-rank adaptation) applied to open-source RoBERTa-base and LLaMA-2-7B models; (3) supervised fine-tuning of GPT-4.1 mini across two independent training runs; and (4) embedding-based regression using 4 pretrained encoders (all-mpnet-base-v2, E5-large-v2, text-embedding-3-small, and text-embedding-3-large) with a multioutput ridge regression. Results: Supervised fine-tuning yielded the strongest overall performance among the evaluated approaches. In the best-performing run, correlations reached Conclusions: LLM-based approaches exhibit trait-dependent performance in predicting personality from naturalistic dialogue, with fine-tuning substantially improving correspondence with validated psychometric scores. These findings suggest that personality inference from naturalistic dialogue is feasible but depends strongly on modeling strategy, trait domain, and the availability of supervised fine-tuning with validated personality measures.
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.