arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2508.21628cs.CLcs.HC

个性至关重要:在多轮协作任务中用户特质可预测 LLM 偏好

Personality Matters: User Traits Predict LLM Preferences in Multi-Turn Collaborative Tasks

Brock University(布鲁克大学);Emory University(埃默里大学)

Sarfaroz Yunusov, Kaige Chen, Kazi Nishat Anwar, Ali Emami

AI总结:

本文通过 32 名四类 Keirsey 人格用户与 GPT-4、Claude 3.5 的多任务协作实验,证明人格特质会显著影响 LLM 偏好,并揭示总体评分相近时传统评估忽略的模型差异。

摘要:

随着大型语言模型(LLM)日益融入日常工作流程,用户会通过多轮协作塑造结果,一个关键问题随之出现:具有不同人格特质的用户是否会系统性地偏好某些 LLM 而非其他模型?我们开展了一项研究,32 名参与者均匀分布于四种 Keirsey 人格类型,评估他们在数据分析、创意写作、信息检索和写作辅助四项协作任务中与 GPT-4 和 Claude 3.5 的交互。结果揭示了显著的人格驱动偏好:Rationals 强烈偏好 GPT-4,尤其是在目标导向任务中;而 Idealists 偏爱 Claude 3.5,特别是在创意和分析任务中。其他人格类型表现出依赖任务的偏好。对定性反馈的情感分析证实了这些模式。值得注意的是,各模型的总体有用性评分相近,表明基于人格的分析能够揭示传统评估所遗漏的 LLM 差异。

英文摘要:

As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly integrate into everyday workflows, where users shape outcomes through multi-turn collaboration, a critical question emerges: do users with different personality traits systematically prefer certain LLMs over others? We conducted a study with 32 participants evenly distributed across four Keirsey personality types, evaluating their interactions with GPT-4 and Claude 3.5 across four collaborative tasks: data analysis, creative writing, information retrieval, and writing assistance. Results revealed significant personality-driven preferences: Rationals strongly preferred GPT-4, particularly for goal-oriented tasks, while idealists favored Claude 3.5, especially for creative and analytical tasks. Other personality types showed task-dependent preferences. Sentiment analysis of qualitative feedback confirmed these patterns. Notably, aggregate helpfulness ratings were similar across models, showing how personality-based analysis reveals LLM differences that traditional evaluations miss.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑