GenPT: Beyond Self-Report for Reliable LLM Psychometrics via Generative Projective Testing

Personality assessment through situational judgment tests (SJTs) offers unique advantages over traditional Likert-type self-report scales, yet their development remains labor-intensive, time-consuming, and heavily dependent on subject matter experts. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for automatic item generation (AIG). Building on these developments, the present study focuses on developing and evaluating a structured and generalizable framework for automatically generating personality SJTs, using GPT-4 and ChatGPT-5 as empirical examples. Three studies were conducted. Study 1 systematically compared the effects of prompt design and temperature settings on the content validity of LLM-generated items to develop an effective and stable LLM-based AIG approach for personality SJT. Results showed that optimized prompts and a temperature of 1.0 achieved the best balance of creativity and accuracy on GPT-4. Study 2 examined the cross-model generalizability and reproducibility of this automated SJT generation approach through multiple rounds. The results showed that the approach consistently produced reproducible and high-quality items on ChatGPT-5. Study 3 evaluated the psychometric properties of LLM-generated SJTs covering five facets of the Big Five personality traits. Results demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity across most facets, though limitations were observed in the convergent validity of the compliance facet and certain aspects of criterion-related validity. These findings provide robust evidence that the proposed LLM-based AIG approach can produce culturally appropriate and psychometrically sound SJTs with efficiency comparable to or exceeding traditional methods.

We examine whether human psychometric questionnaires can serve as reliable tools for characterizing and predicting LLM behavior in everyday user interactions. We analyze eight open-source LLMs by comparing their value and personality profiles derived from two different methods: Likert self-reports on established questionnaires (PVQ-40/21 and BFI-44/10) and generation probabilities over value-laden responses to everyday user queries. The two profiles diverge substantially. Within-construct item consistency, often cited as evidence of stable LLM dispositions, disappears in generation probabilities. We find that established questionnaire items contain explicit lexical cues that allow models to recognize the target construct and respond in alignment-consistent, socially desirable ways, whereas realistic user queries contain far less recognizable cues. In addition, demographic persona prompts shift models' responses to human questionnaires in ways consistent with real human patterns, but no such shifts appear in the generation setting, highlighting that human questionnaires overestimate LLMs' ability to faithfully reproduce expected psychological traits when role-playing demographic personas. Overall, our study indicates that questionnaire scores alone should not be treated as evidence of LLMs' response tendencies in realistic user interactions, and supports generation-probability profiling with ecologically valid items as a complementary behavioral measure.

Recent advances in natural language processing have enabled increasingly accurate estimation of psychological traits from language. However, most existing approaches rely on supervised models trained to predict questionnaire scores, limiting interpretability and generalizability across contexts. The present study introduces a theory-driven and fully unsupervised framework for measuring psychological states directly from natural language using semantic projection. Psychological constructs were operationalized as interpretable semantic axes derived from lexical anchors and items from validated clinical scales assessing depression, anxiety, and worry. Participants textual responses were embedded using Sentence-BERT and projected onto these axes to generate continuous psychological scores across multiple response formats, including selected words, generated words, phrases, and free-text responses. Projection scores were evaluated through correlations with standardized clinical measures , split-half reliability analyses, attenuation corrections, distributional similarity using Wasserstein distance, and comparisons with lexicon-based sentiment analysis (VADER). Results showed strong associations between projection scores and clinical measures, particularly for structured formats such as selected words, written words, and phrases. Free-text responses produced weaker results when analyzed as whole texts, but performance improved substantially when sentence-level aggregation strategies were applied. These findings support semantic projection as an interpretable and scalable alternative to supervised language models for psychological assessment and highlight the importance of response format and text-processing strategies in language-based mental health measurement.