Database Report: Twin-2K-500: A Data Set for Building Digital Twins of over 2,000 People Based on Their Answers to over 500 Questions

References

• Alattar L, Messel M, Rogofsky D (2018) An introduction to the understanding America study internet panel. Soc. Security Bull. 78(2):13–28.Google Scholar
• Argyle LP, Busby EC, Fulda N, Gubler JR, Rytting C, Wingate D (2023) Out of one, many: Using language models to simulate human samples. Political Anal. (Oxford) 31(3):337–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arora N, Chakraborty I, Nishimura Y (2024) Express: AI-human hybrids for marketing research: Leveraging LLMs as collaborators. J. Marketing 89(2):43–70.Google Scholar
• Baron J, Hershey JC (1988) Outcome bias in decision evaluation. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 54(4):569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA (1988) An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties. J. Consulting Clinical Psych. 56(6):893.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J (1961) An inventory for measuring depression. Arch. General Psychiatry 4:561–571.Google Scholar
• Brand J, Israeli A, Ngwe D (2023) Using LLMs for market research. Preprint, submitted March 30, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4395751.Google Scholar
• Brucks M, Toubia O (2025) Prompt architecture induces methodological artifacts in large language models. PLoS One 20(4):e0319159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cacioppo JT, Petty RE, Kao CF (1984) The efficient assessment of need for cognition. J. Personality Assessment 48(3):306–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell JD, Trapnell PD, Heine SJ, Katz IM, Lavallee LF, Lehman DR (1996) Self-concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 70(1):141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carré A, Stefaniak N, d’Ambrosio F, Bensalah L, Besche-Richard C (2013) The basic empathy scale in adults (BES-A): Factor structure of a revised form. Psych. Assessment 25(3):679–691.Google Scholar
• Dean M, Ortoleva P (2019) The empirical relationship between nonstandard economic behaviors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116(33):16262–16267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dillion D, Tandon N, Gu Y, Gray K (2023) Can AI language models replace human participants? Trends Cognitive Sci. 27(7):597–600.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epley N, Keysar B, Van Boven L, Gilovich T (2004) Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 87(3):327–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fellner B, Holler M, Kirchler E, Schabmann A (2007) Regulatory focus scale (RFS): Development of a scale to record dispositional regulatory focus. Swiss J. Psych. 66(2):109–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furnas AC, LaPira TM (2024) The people think what I think: False consensus and unelected elite misperception of public opinion. Amer. J. Political Sci. 68(3):958–971.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goli A, Singh A (2024) Frontiers: Can large language models capture human preferences? Marketing Sci. 43(4):709–722.Google Scholar
• Gray K, Anderson S, Chen EE, Kelly JM, Christian MS, Patrick J, Huang L, et al. (2019) “Forward flow”: A new measure to quantify free thought and predict creativity. Amer. Psychologist 74(5):539–554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gui G, Toubia O (2023) The challenge of using LLMs to simulate human behavior: A causal inference perspective. Preprint, submitted December 24, https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.15524.Google Scholar
• Güth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 3(4):367–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haws KL, Winterich KP, Naylor RW (2014) Seeing the world through green-tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. J. Consumer Psych. 24(3):336–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Higgins ET, Klein R, Strauman T (1985) Self-concept discrepancy theory: A psychological model for distinguishing among different aspects of depression and anxiety. Soc. Cognition 3(1):51–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Horton JJ (2023) Large language models as simulated economic agents: What can we learn from Homo silicus? Preprint, submitted January 18, https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.07543.Google Scholar
• John OP, Srivastava S (1999) The big-five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Pervin LA, John OA, eds. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2nd ed. (Guilford Press, New York), 102–138.Google Scholar
• Johnson EJ, Meier S, Toubia O (2019) What’s the catch? Suspicion of bank motives and sluggish refinancing. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(2):467–495.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1973) On the psychology of prediction. Psych. Rev. 80(4):237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klauer KC, Stahl C, Erdfelder E (2007) The abstract selection task: New data and an almost comprehensive model. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 33(4):680.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krefeld-Schwalb A, Sugerman ER, Johnson EJ (2024) Exposing omitted moderators: Explaining why effect sizes differ in the social sciences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 121(12):e2306281121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lennox RD, Wolfe RN (1984) Revision of the self-monitoring scale. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 46(6):1349–1364.Google Scholar
• Li A, Chen H, Namkoong H, Peng T (2025) LLM generated persona is a promise with a catch. Preprint, submitted March 18, https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16527.Google Scholar
• Markovits H, Nantel G (1989) The belief-bias effect in the production and evaluation of logical conclusions. Memory Cognition 17(1):11–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Motoki F, Pinho Neto V, Rodrigues V (2024) More human than human: Measuring ChatGPT political bias. Public Choice 198(1):3–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nenkov GY, Morrin M, Ward A, Schwartz B, Hulland J (2008) A short form of the maximization scale: Factor structure, reliability and validity studies. Judgment Decision Making 3(5):371–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park JS, O’Brien JC, Cai CJ, Morris MR, Liang P, Bernstein MS (2023) Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. Preprint, submitted April 7, https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03442.Google Scholar
• Park JS, Zou CQ, Shaw A, Hill BM, Cai C, Morris MR, Willer R, et al. (2024) Generative agent simulations of 1,000 people. Preprint, submitted November 15, https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.10109.Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center (2023) Pew Research Center survey data sets. Accessed May 16, 2024, https://www.pewresearch.org/download-datasets/.Google Scholar
• Qin X, Huang M, Ding J (2024) Aiturk: Using ChatGPT for social science research. Preprint, submitted June 7, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4922861.Google Scholar
• Reynolds WM (1982) Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. J. Clinical Psych. 38(1):119–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rick SI, Cryder CE, Loewenstein G (2008) Tightwads and spendthrifts. J. Consumer Res. 34(6):767–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roets A, Van Hiel A (2011) Item selection and validation of a brief, 15-item version of the need for closure scale. Personality Individual Differences 50(1):90–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruvio A, Shoham A, Brenčič MM (2008) Consumers’ need for uniqueness: Short-form scale development and cross-cultural validation. Internat. Marketing Rev. 25(1):33–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santurkar S, Durmus E, Ladhak F, Lee C, Liang P, Hashimoto T (2023) Whose opinions do language models reflect? Lawrence N, ed. Proc. Internat. Conf. Machine Learn. (PMLR, New York), 29971–30004.Google Scholar
• Stanovich KE, West RF (2008) On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 94(4):672.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thaler R (1985) Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Sci. 4(3):199–214.Link, Google Scholar
• Trapnell PD, Paulhus DL (2012) Agentic and communal values: Their scope and measurement. J. Personality Assessment 94(1):39–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Triandis HC, Gelfand MJ (1998) Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 74(1):118–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science 185(4157):1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psych. Rev. 90(4):293–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilson AV, Bellezza S (2022) Consumer minimalism. J. Consumer Res. 48(5):796–816.Crossref, Google Scholar