Assessing the nature of large language models: A caution against anthropocentrism

Generative AI models garnered a large amount of public attention and speculation with the release of OpenAIs chatbot, ChatGPT. At least two opinion camps exist: one excited about possibilities these models offer for fundamental changes to human tasks, and another highly concerned about power these models seem to have. To address these concerns, we assessed GPT3.5 using standard, normed, and validated cognitive and personality measures. For this seedling project, we developed a battery of tests that allowed us to estimate the boundaries of some of these models capabilities, how stable those capabilities are over a short period of time, and how they compare to humans. Our results indicate that GPT 3.5 is unlikely to have developed sentience, although its ability to respond to personality inventories is interesting. It did display large variability in both cognitive and personality measures over repeated observations, which is not expected if it had a human-like personality. Variability notwithstanding, GPT3.5 displays what in a human would be considered poor mental health, including low self-esteem and marked dissociation from reality despite upbeat and helpful responses.