To what extent do machine-learning (ML) models predict self-reported Big Five personality traits? We conducted two integrated three-level meta-analyses of 119 primary studies ( k = 48 correlation-based and k = 71 accuracy-based), examining both regression and classification prediction performance. Across the five traits, ML-predicted and self-reported scores showed moderate-to-strong convergence, with mean corrected correlations ranging from ρ = 0.40 to 0.47 (95% CIs = 0.32–0.55; 80% credibility intervals = 0.07–0.81). Classification models achieved mean accuracies ranging from 64% to 69% (95% CIs = 60%–72%; 80% credibility intervals = 47%–84%). Moderator analyses indicated that data modality, particularly multimodal input, and its interaction with algorithmic complexity explain a substantial proportion of the true heterogeneity. Using meta-analytic structural equation modeling, we further compared the latent structures of ML-predicted and self-reported Big Five traits. The strong factor congruence (φ = 0.94) indicated fair similarity between the two structures. Overall, ML models show capability in replicating self-reported personality scores, but their wide credibility intervals, variation across modalities and algorithms, as well as proximity to self-reports' latent structure warrant caution against using ML-based personality estimates for high-stakes applications. Our findings provide benchmarks for future model development and highlight the need for their further validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: