LLMs Aren't Human: A Critical Perspective on LLM Personality
Kim Zierahn, Cristina Cachero, Anna Korhonen, and Nuria Oliver

TL;DR
This paper critically examines whether current methods for assessing personality in Large Language Models truly measure human-like personality traits, arguing for a shift towards functional and intrinsic behavior evaluations.
Contribution
It challenges the validity of applying human personality tests to LLMs and proposes a new research agenda for more appropriate characterization methods.
Findings
LLM responses do not fully meet the criteria of human personality traits.
Current personality assessments for LLMs may not measure intrinsic or stable traits.
A shift towards functional evaluations is recommended for better understanding LLM behavior.
Abstract
A growing body of research examines personality traits in Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly in human-agent collaboration. Prior work has frequently applied the Big Five inventory to assess LLM behavior analogous to human personality, without questioning the underlying assumptions. This paper critically evaluates whether LLM responses to personality tests satisfy six defining characteristics of personality. We find that none are fully met, indicating that such assessments do not measure a construct equivalent to human personality. We propose a research agenda for shifting from anthropomorphic trait attribution toward functional evaluations, clarifying what personality tests actually capture in LLMs and developing LLM-specific frameworks for characterizing stable, intrinsic behavior.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsTopic Modeling · Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
