Assessing the nature of large language models: A caution against anthropocentrism
Generative AI models garnered a large amount of public attention and speculation with the release of OpenAIs chatbot, ChatGPT. At least two opinion camps exist: one excited about possibilities these models offer for fundamental changes to human tasks, and another highly concerned about power these models seem to have. To address these concerns, we assessed several LLMs, primarily GPT 3.5, using standard, normed, and validated cognitive and personality measures. For this seedling project, we developed a battery of tests that allowed us to estimate the boundaries of some of these models capabilities, how stable those capabilities are over a sho
Resource information
- Authors
- Speed, Ann
- Research area
- Artificial intelligence
- Research topics
- Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computation and Language (cs.CL), Computers and Society (cs.CY), Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC), FOS: Computer and information sciences, FOS: Computer and information sciences
- Publication date
- 2023
- DOI
- 10.48550/arxiv.2309.07683
- Upstream last modified
- Jun 27, 2024
- License
- Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
- Last record update
- Nov 4, 2026
About this resource
Generative AI models garnered a large amount of public attention and speculation with the release of OpenAIs chatbot, ChatGPT. At least two opinion camps exist: one excited about possibilities these models offer for fundamental changes to human tasks, and another highly concerned about power these models seem to have. To address these concerns, we assessed several LLMs, primarily GPT 3.5, using standard, normed, and validated cognitive and personality measures. For this seedling project, we developed a battery of tests that allowed us to estimate the boundaries of some of these models capabilities, how stable those capabilities are over a short period of time, and how they compare to humans. Our results indicate that LLMs are unlikely to have developed sentience, although its ability to respond to personality inventories is interesting. GPT3.5 did display large variability in both cognitive and personality measures over repeated observations, which is not expected if it had a human-like personality. Variability notwithstanding, LLMs display what in a human would be considered poor mental health, including low self-esteem, marked dissociation from reality, and in some cases narcissism and psychopathy, despite upbeat and helpful responses.