Are chatbots reliable text annotators? Sometimes

Recent research highlights the significant potential of ChatGPT for text annotation in social science research. However, ChatGPT is a closed-source product, which has major drawbacks with regards to transparency, reproducibility, cost, and data protection. Recent advances in open-source (OS) large language models (LLMs) offer an alternative without these drawbacks. Thus, it is important to evaluate the performance of OS LLMs relative to ChatGPT and standard approaches to supervised machine learning classification. We conduct a systematic comparative evaluation of the performance of a range of OS LLMs alongside ChatGPT, using both zero- and few-shot learning as well as generic and custom prompts, with results compared with supervised classification models. Using a new dataset of tweets from US news media and focusing on simple binary text annotation tasks, we find significant variation in the performance of ChatGPT and OS models across the tasks and that the supervised classifier using DistilBERT generally outperforms both. Given the unreliable performance of ChatGPT and the significant challenges it poses to Open Science, we advise caution when using ChatGPT for substantive text annotation tasks.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PNAS Nexus
Published
2025-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf069
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Topic Modeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.92

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Are chatbots reliable text annotators? Sometimes

Lene Aarøe, Miceal Canavan, Ross Deans Kristensen‐McLachlan, Márton Kardos et al.
4 citations
PNAS Nexus
Topic Modeling
9.92
article

Are chatbots reliable text annotators? Sometimes

Lene Aarøe, Miceal Canavan, Ross Deans Kristensen‐McLachlan, Márton Kardos, Mia Jacobsen
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Recent research highlights the significant potential of ChatGPT for text annotation in social science research. However, ChatGPT is a closed-source product, which has major drawbacks with regards to transparency, reproducibility, cost, and data protection. Recent advances in open-source (OS) large language models (LLMs) offer an alternative without these drawbacks. Thus, it is important to evaluate the performance of OS LLMs relative to ChatGPT and standard approaches to supervised machine learning classification. We conduct a systematic comparative evaluation of the performance of a range of OS LLMs alongside ChatGPT, using both zero- and few-shot learning as well as generic and custom prompts, with results compared with supervised classification models. Using a new dataset of tweets from US news media and focusing on simple binary text annotation tasks, we find significant variation in the performance of ChatGPT and OS models across the tasks and that the supervised classifier using DistilBERT generally outperforms both. Given the unreliable performance of ChatGPT and the significant challenges it poses to Open Science, we advise caution when using ChatGPT for substantive text annotation tasks.

PNAS NexusVol. 4(4)
Aarhus University (DK), Aarhus University Hospital (DK)
Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Topic Modeling
9.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.