A Systematic Analysis of the Impact of Persona Steering on LLM Capabilities

Can large language models reliably express a human-like personality, or are they merely mimicking surface cues without a stable underlying profile? To investigate this, we induce personality in LLMs by fine-tuning them on the long-form essays, where each essay is associated with a target Big Five personality profile. We then evaluate the stability and fidelity of the induced personality using the IPIP-NEO questionnaire. Specifically, we ask: (i) does post-training (SFT, DPO, ORPO) stabilize questionnaire scores under prompt rephrasings, and (ii) can it induce target Big Five profiles from unguided essays? Our results demonstrate that fine-tuning consistently reduces variance in questionnaire responses across five models, directly mitigating the evaluation fragility reported in pre-trained models. However, this newfound stability reveals a more fundamental limitation: accuracy on the full five-dimensional profile remains near chance, even when single-trait scores improve. This indicates that unguided essays lack the cues needed for faithful personality expression. We therefore argue for scenario-grounded datasets or interactive elicitation that accumulates test-aligned evidence over time.

Human problem-solving is enriched by a diversity of styles and personality traits, yet the development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has largely prioritized uniform performance benchmarks that favour specific behavioural tendencies such as assertiveness. To investigate how diverse experiences shape machine personality and influence problem-solving, this study employs continued pre-training to expose models to domain-specific texts in an unsupervised manner, simulating the accumulation of experience. By adapting the Big Five framework via the Machine Personality Inventory (MPI), we quantify the personality traits of these model variants and analyse their relationship to linguistic style and reasoning behaviour. The findings reveal that model competence is bimodal, peaking at "Expressive Generalists" and "Suppressed Specialists," while identifying a "Suppression Advantage" where reduced social traits enhance complex reasoning performance. This study further establishes a causal link between training data linguistics, such as imperative frequency, and lexical diversity, providing a roadmap for "Personality Engineering".

Current methods for personality control in Large Language Models rely on static prompting or expensive fine-tuning, failing to capture the dynamic and compositional nature of human traits. We introduce PERSONA, a training-free framework that achieves fine-tuning level performance through direct manipulation of personality vectors in activation space. Our key insight is that personality traits appear as extractable, approximately orthogonal directions in the model's representation space that support algebraic operations. The framework operates through three stages: Persona-Base extracts orthogonal trait vectors via contrastive activation analysis; Persona-Algebra enables precise control through vector arithmetic (scalar multiplication for intensity, addition for composition, subtraction for suppression); and Persona-Flow achieves context-aware adaptation by dynamically composing these vectors during inference. On PersonalityBench, our approach achieves a mean score of 9.60, nearly matching the supervised fine-tuning upper bound of 9.61 without any gradient updates. On our proposed Persona-Evolve benchmark for dynamic personality adaptation, we achieve up to 91% win rates across diverse model families. These results provide evidence that aspects of LLM personality are mathematically tractable, opening new directions for interpretable and efficient behavioral control.