arXiv preprint ·
Personas Are Not People: Identity as State, Not Attribute
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Synthetic populations, large sets of simulated people, are increasingly used in place of real people to pretest surveys, simulate users and communities, and evaluate AI systems. Each simulated person is defined by a persona, a written profile of fixed traits, demographics, and attitudes that a language model is instructed to act out. Every such system assumes that a person's identity is a stable attribute that behaves the same way in every situation the simulation presents. We show that this assumption is not a harmless simplification. Three decades of personality research find the opposite. How a given person behaves varies more across contexts than people vary from one another. Drawing on identity economics, which describes how different situations activate different identities and norms within the same person, we separate behavior into three parts, which are stable traits, the identity a context calls up, and the situation itself. We then prove, under two stated assumptions, that any simulation built on fixed personas, no matter how detailed the personas or how large the underlying model, cannot reproduce the part of a population's behavior that is specific to it and its circumstances. We propose a new evaluation criterion based on this result and a person-in-context design that can meet it in principle. We test one version on a naturalistic Reddit personality corpus and on a published clinical-trial recruitment survey of a community with documented distrust of medical institutions. The design does produce context-dependent behavior when tested directly, but in neither setting does it fully match the real population, and we show where it falls short. The consequence for practice is a risk that synthetic-population evaluations misrepresent the groups whose behavior is most shaped by context, a distortion that richer personas cannot correct.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
Swapping the Judge Changes the Ranking: A Preregistered Study of Cross-Provider Replication in LLM-Judged System Comparisons
Sure Enough to Share? Overconfidence in GenAI Video Discernment is Associated with Sharing Intentions
Palimpsestic Accountability in the US Federal AI Inventories
Thick Alignment: A Social Framework for Values and AI Systems
From Guidelines to Practice: Defining Requirements for AI Red-Teaming Tools
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.