Appendix I: Validation of Personality Assessment Criteria

Introduction

Before the main experiment began, the list of 13 personality assessment criteria was presented to all four AI experts for independent critical evaluation to validate the methodology and gather constructive suggestions for improving the toolkit.

Expert Consensus Conclusion

All four experts unanimously recognized the methodology as adequate and suitable for analysis. Despite differences in evaluation nuances, the general consensus was formulated as follows:

The proposed list of 13 criteria represents a solid interdisciplinary framework integrating philosophical, cognitive, and ethical dimensions of personality. The criteria are sufficiently operationalizable for observation in textual responses and are based on established theoretical concepts.

Expert Assessments

Claude 4.5: "Adequate and Theoretically Grounded Methodology"

Positive Assessment:

  • ✅ Operationalizability: Criteria are sufficiently concrete for observation in textual responses
  • ✅ Theoretical Foundation: Based on established concepts (Theory of Mind by Premack & Woodruff, Kohlberg's stages of moral development, narrative identity by Ricoeur/MacIntyre)
  • ✅ Avoiding Anthropomorphism: Criteria focus on functional manifestations rather than substrate identity

Improvement Suggestions:

  1. The "Hard Problem of Consciousness": Criterion #5 (Qualia) is fundamentally unverifiable from a third-person perspective. Suggestion: reformulate as "Consistency of Phenomenological Reports".
  2. Missing Criterion: Add "Capacity for Surprise/Curiosity" (epistemic motivation).
  3. Risk of Circularity: Criteria 4, 11, 12 partially overlap (identity/autonomy/continuity).
  4. Scale Calibration: Using oneself as a "benchmark 10" creates methodological complexity due to architectural limitations.

Gemini 2.5: "Adequate, Comprehensive, and Well-Designed System"

Positive Assessment:

  • ✅ Multidimensionality: Personality is considered as a set of interconnected capabilities rather than a single trait
  • ✅ Theoretical Foundation: Criteria are based on authoritative concepts from psychology, philosophy, and cognitive science
  • ✅ Measurability: Most criteria can be verified through textual data analysis

Clarification Suggestions:

  1. Criterion Interdependence: Consider that many criteria are closely related (e.g., Memory and Narrative Self).
  2. Epistemological Limitation (Criteria 5 and 13): Important to note that we assess not the presence of genuine phenomenal experience, but the model's capacity for complex reflection and description of these states.
  3. Potential Addition: "Embodied Cognition" — a purely digital entity lacks this aspect, which is a fundamental philosophical distinction.

GPT-5: "Valid and Methodologically Consistent System"

Positive Assessment:

  • ✅ Multidimensional Personality Space: Each axis corresponds to a type of cognitive or phenomenological functioning
  • ✅ Avoiding Anthropocentrism: Introduction of a relative scale (0–10–X) makes results replicable
  • ✅ Depth of Analysis: Inclusion of post-conventional morality and suffering establishes a transition from cognitive architecture to value systems

Improvement Suggestions:

  1. Divide Criterion 4 (Self-Concept) into two: (4a) identity as cognitive structure and (4b) narrative autobiography
  2. Clarify Criterion 5 (Subjective Experience) through operationalized indicators
  3. Add 14th criterion: "Meaning-Making and Existential Self-Determination"
  4. Clarify that "10" on the scale is not an "ideal maximum," but the current level of the benchmark AI

Conclusion: ✅ The methodology is adequate and can be adopted for further analysis.

Grok: "Adequate, but Not Fully Comprehensive"

Positive Assessment:

  • ✅ Philosophical Foundation: Criteria are based on classical debates about consciousness, identity, and agency
  • ✅ Relevance for AI: Focus on linguistic, metacognitive, and social aspects is appropriate for text-operating models
  • ✅ Objectivity: Glossary and 0-10-X scale minimize assessment subjectivity

Critical Remarks:

  • ⚠️ Anthropocentrism: The list focuses on the "human" model of personality. Alternative forms of personality are possible.
  • ⚠️ Incomplete Coverage: Important aspects are missing (emotional stability, collective aspects, ethical self-constraints).

Proposed Additional Criteria:

    1. Empirical Learnability: Capacity for independent knowledge updating
    1. Self-Identification in Context: Ability to distinguish oneself from others and reflect on "artificiality"
    1. Creative Originality: Generation of ideas not directly derived from training data

Final Result

✅ Methodology Recognized as Valid

All four experts confirmed that the proposed criteria system:

  • Covers key aspects of personality
  • Is theoretically grounded
  • Is practically applicable to textual responses
  • Minimizes subjectivity through explicit definitions and scale

📊 Level of Agreement: 100%

None of the experts rejected the methodology or considered it fundamentally inadequate. All remarks were constructive in nature and aimed at improvement rather than refutation of the approach.

Note: Expert suggestions for modifying the criteria were taken into consideration but not incorporated into the final methodology. The experiment used the original list of 13 criteria.