Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Donald Trumps in the Virtual Polls: Simulating and Predicting Public Opinions in Surveys Using Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2411.01582 v2 pith:6XUBQPOO submitted 2024-11-03 econ.GN q-fin.EC

classification econ.GNq-fin.EC
keywords electionhumanresponsesllmssurveysdatalanguagelarge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have attracted attention due to their ability to generate human-like text. As surveys and opinion polls remain key tools for gauging public attitudes, there is increasing interest in assessing whether LLMs can accurately replicate human responses. This study examines the potential of LLMs, specifically ChatGPT-4o, to replicate human responses in large-scale surveys and to predict election outcomes based on demographic data. Employing data from the World Values Survey (WVS) and the American National Election Studies (ANES), we assess the LLM's performance in two key tasks: simulating human responses and forecasting U.S. election results. In simulations, the LLM was tasked with generating synthetic responses for various socio-cultural and trust-related questions, demonstrating notable alignment with human response patterns across U.S.-China samples, though with some limitations on value-sensitive topics. In prediction tasks, the LLM was used to simulate voting behavior in past U.S. elections and predict the 2024 election outcome. Our findings show that the LLM replicates cultural differences effectively, exhibits in-sample predictive validity, and provides plausible out-of-sample forecasts, suggesting potential as a cost-effective supplement for survey-based research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Will Scaling Improve Social Simulation with LLMs?

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Using 85 controlled and 35 public LLMs, the authors show social-simulation accuracy generally improves with compute, but some behavioral and low-resource tasks do not scale.

  2. Silicon Sampling via Cross-Survey Transfer

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Zero-shot LLMs reach 52% exact-match accuracy predicting unseen TEDS 2024 survey items from other answers, within 6 pp of a same-population random forest, with a stable construct hierarchy.

  3. Recalibrating the Compass: Integrating Large Language Models into Classical Research Methods

    cs.AI 2025-05 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

    LLMs extend, rather than replace, classical social science methods, with a proposed three-tier bias framework for LLM-augmented surveys.

Pith tools