arXiv · 2508.05830
"Mirror" Large Language Model Evaluations of Depression are Criterion Contaminated
Abstract
Large Language Model (LLM) studies that use language responses elicited from depression assessments to predict scores on those same assessments often report near-perfect prediction of depression. We refer to these as "Mirror" evaluations and demonstrate an applied case of criterion contamination. N = 110 participants completed both structured diagnostic depression interviews (Mirror condition) and life history interviews ("Non-Mirror" condition). LLMs were prompted to predict depression scores in each condition. As expected, Mirror evaluations were near-perfect. However, Non-Mirror evaluations also displayed prediction sizes considered outstanding in psychology. Further, both Mirror and Non-Mirror predictions correlated with Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores at similar sizes, suggesting the Mirror condition's advantage collapses when predicting an independent depression measurement. Topic modeling revealed differing depression-related themes across interview types. Mirror evaluations are better considered as reliability evaluations than as validity evaluations. Incorporating Non-Mirror approaches in LLM depression assessment may support more valid and clinically-relevant applications. Keywords: large language models, psychological assessment, psychopathology, depression, reliability, validity, criterion contamination
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Tong Li, Rasiq Hussain, Mehak Gupta, Joshua R. Oltmanns. 2025-08-07. "Mirror" Large Language Model Evaluations of Depression are Criterion Contaminated. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.05830
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.