Assessing the Reliability and Validity of GPT-4 in Annotating Emotion Appraisal Ratings
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866908279639113728 |
|---|---|
| author | Ruder, Deniss Uusberg, Andero Sirts, Kairit |
| author_facet | Ruder, Deniss Uusberg, Andero Sirts, Kairit |
| contents | Appraisal theories suggest that emotions arise from subjective evaluations of events, referred to as appraisals. The taxonomy of appraisals is quite diverse, and they are usually given ratings on a Likert scale to be annotated in an experiencer-annotator or reader-annotator paradigm. This paper studies GPT-4 as a reader-annotator of 21 specific appraisal ratings in different prompt settings, aiming to evaluate and improve its performance compared to human annotators. We found that GPT-4 is an effective reader-annotator that performs close to or even slightly better than human annotators, and its results can be significantly improved by using a majority voting of five completions. GPT-4 also effectively predicts appraisal ratings and emotion labels using a single prompt, but adding instruction complexity results in poorer performance. We also found that longer event descriptions lead to more accurate annotations for both model and human annotator ratings. This work contributes to the growing usage of LLMs in psychology and the strategies for improving GPT-4 performance in annotating appraisals. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2503_16883 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Assessing the Reliability and Validity of GPT-4 in Annotating Emotion Appraisal Ratings Ruder, Deniss Uusberg, Andero Sirts, Kairit Computation and Language Appraisal theories suggest that emotions arise from subjective evaluations of events, referred to as appraisals. The taxonomy of appraisals is quite diverse, and they are usually given ratings on a Likert scale to be annotated in an experiencer-annotator or reader-annotator paradigm. This paper studies GPT-4 as a reader-annotator of 21 specific appraisal ratings in different prompt settings, aiming to evaluate and improve its performance compared to human annotators. We found that GPT-4 is an effective reader-annotator that performs close to or even slightly better than human annotators, and its results can be significantly improved by using a majority voting of five completions. GPT-4 also effectively predicts appraisal ratings and emotion labels using a single prompt, but adding instruction complexity results in poorer performance. We also found that longer event descriptions lead to more accurate annotations for both model and human annotator ratings. This work contributes to the growing usage of LLMs in psychology and the strategies for improving GPT-4 performance in annotating appraisals. |
| title | Assessing the Reliability and Validity of GPT-4 in Annotating Emotion Appraisal Ratings |
| topic | Computation and Language |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16883 |