Participant Interactions with Artificial Intelligence: Using Large Language Models to Generate Research Materials for Surveys and Experiments
Abstract
Researchers are increasingly exploring the use of large language models (LLMs) to develop materials for surveys and experiments. However, clear guidance on effective implementation remains limited. In this paper, we propose a decision-making framework comprising five use cases for integrating large language models into psychological survey and experimental methods: (1) LLM as research assistant; (2) LLM as adaptive content creator; (3) LLM as external resource; (4) LLM as conversation partner, and (5) LLM as research confederate. To support these applications, we introduce the open-source Qualtrics-AI Link (QUAIL), a software designed to integrate content generated by ChatGPT's LLM foundation model into the Qualtrics platform. Across contexts, and for all scenarios involving the use of LLMs in research material creation, we provide guidance on the technical steps necessary to support both internal and external validity. These include effective prompt engineering, model selection, alpha and beta testing, launching, and monitoring. We conclude with a discussion of relevant ethical considerations, cautions, and resources for auditing validity claims. Throughout, we emphasize that good research design and adherence to ethical principles should guide decision-making, and that researcher expertise in both LLMs and research design is essential to ensure valid participant interactions when using LLM-based tools.
Study specs
The paper outlines a decision-making framework for five potential uses of LLMs in survey and experimental design, introduces software (QUAIL) for integrating LLM knowledge into Qualtrics, and details technical steps such as prompt engineering, model testing, and validity monitoring.
- Authors
- TS Behrend,RN Landers
- Study Type
- methodology
- Year
- 2025
- Human Data Platform
- Prolific
- Source
- View Source DOI Google Scholar
Measured Outcomes
Applications, implementation strategies, and ethical considerations of large language models in psychological research material development.
Peer Review & Critical Discussion
Potential Selection Bias in 2023 Cohort
The participant pool shows a concerning overrepresentation of users from high-income demographics. Looking at Table 3, we can see that 78% of respondents had annual incomes above $75k, which significantly limits the generalizability of these findings to broader populations.
Non-naive Participants Issue
I've noticed a methodological concern regarding participant naivety. Given that Prolific users often complete multiple studies, there's a real risk that participants had prior exposure to similar experimental paradigms, which could confound the results.
RLHF Applicability to This Study Design
The implications for RLHF training pipelines are understated. If we accept the authors' conclusions about preference stability, this has direct consequences for how we should structure reward model training. The temporal decay effect described in Section 4.2 is particularly relevant.
Verify your expertise to join discussion
Create an account and verify your credentials to participate in peer discussions.