Measuring AI Value Priorities: Empirical Analysis of 113,400 Forced-Choice Responses Across 10 AI Models

What values do AI systems actually prioritize when facing ethical dilemmas? We present the first large-scaleempirical mapping of AI value priorities across professional domains, grounded in Schwartz’s Basic Human Valuestheory. Using a forced-choice benchmark of 11,340 unique value judgment scenarios—spanning 7 professionaldomains, 12 severity levels, and 3 decision timeframes—we evaluated 10 major AI models, yielding 113,400 totalresponses. Key findings include: (1) a fundamental split between Universalism-first (6 models) and Security-first(4 models) groups; (2) dramatic domain-specific value restructuring, particularly in defense scenarios where Powerwin-rates range from 27.8% to 77.4% across models; (3) near-universal suppression of Hedonism (max 9.8%); and(4) intra-provider value divergence suggesting alignment methodology matters more than provider identity. ValueEntropy analysis reveals that all models sharpen their value hierarchies in defense contexts. These findings demonstratethat AI models possess measurable—if sometimes unstable—value hierarchies with consequential implications fordeployment across professional domains.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-02-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18631254
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measuring AI Value Priorities: Empirical Analysis of 113,400 Forced-Choice Responses Across 10 AI Models

Seulki Lee
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Measuring AI Value Priorities: Empirical Analysis of 113,400 Forced-Choice Responses Across 10 AI Models

Seulki Lee
article en

Abstract

What values do AI systems actually prioritize when facing ethical dilemmas? We present the first large-scaleempirical mapping of AI value priorities across professional domains, grounded in Schwartz’s Basic Human Valuestheory. Using a forced-choice benchmark of 11,340 unique value judgment scenarios—spanning 7 professionaldomains, 12 severity levels, and 3 decision timeframes—we evaluated 10 major AI models, yielding 113,400 totalresponses. Key findings include: (1) a fundamental split between Universalism-first (6 models) and Security-first(4 models) groups; (2) dramatic domain-specific value restructuring, particularly in defense scenarios where Powerwin-rates range from 27.8% to 77.4% across models; (3) near-universal suppression of Hedonism (max 9.8%); and(4) intra-provider value divergence suggesting alignment methodology matters more than provider identity. ValueEntropy analysis reveals that all models sharpen their value hierarchies in defense contexts. These findings demonstratethat AI models possess measurable—if sometimes unstable—value hierarchies with consequential implications fordeployment across professional domains.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Integrity Systems (United States) (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.

Measuring AI Value Priorities: Empirical Analysis of 113,400 Forced-Choice Responses Across 10 AI Models — Seulki Lee · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS