| Title |
Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1073/pnas.1418680112 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wu Youyou, Michal Kosinski, David Stillwell |
| Abstract |
Judging others' personalities is an essential skill in successful social living, as personality is a key driver behind people's interactions, behaviors, and emotions. Although accurate personality judgments stem from social-cognitive skills, developments in machine learning show that computer models can also make valid judgments. This study compares the accuracy of human and computer-based personality judgments, using a sample of 86,220 volunteers who completed a 100-item personality questionnaire. We show that (i) computer predictions based on a generic digital footprint (Facebook Likes) are more accurate (r = 0.56) than those made by the participants' Facebook friends using a personality questionnaire (r = 0.49); (ii) computer models show higher interjudge agreement; and (iii) computer personality judgments have higher external validity when predicting life outcomes such as substance use, political attitudes, and physical health; for some outcomes, they even outperform the self-rated personality scores. Computers outpacing humans in personality judgment presents significant opportunities and challenges in the areas of psychological assessment, marketing, and privacy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,239 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 218 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 75 | 6% |
| Spain | 55 | 4% |
| Germany | 30 | 2% |
| Chile | 29 | 2% |
| Canada | 28 | 2% |
| France | 24 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 24 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 20 | 2% |
| Other | 249 | 20% |
| Unknown | 487 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 970 | 78% |
| Scientists | 213 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 35 | 3% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 21 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,827 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 24 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 15 | <1% |
| Germany | 9 | <1% |
| Australia | 5 | <1% |
| Brazil | 5 | <1% |
| Spain | 4 | <1% |
| Austria | 3 | <1% |
| Finland | 3 | <1% |
| Turkey | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 26 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1731 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 354 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 282 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 222 | 12% |
| Researcher | 187 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 100 | 5% |
| Other | 371 | 20% |
| Unknown | 311 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 443 | 24% |
| Computer Science | 257 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 171 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 150 | 8% |
| Engineering | 58 | 3% |
| Other | 337 | 18% |
| Unknown | 411 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2686. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,623
of 24,945,754 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#82
of 102,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20
of 364,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#3
of 942 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,945,754 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 102,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 942 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.