top of page

THE SCIENCE

The measurement layer for the human side of AI — built on evidence.

Explicit measurement derived from language - not inferred by a model.

In the early 1990s, Dr. James W. Pennebaker began asking whether the words people use can predict their mental and physical health, their personalities, their social behaviors, and their cognitive processes. The answer was yes. That work became the foundation of Receptiviti's measurement.

WHAT PSYCHOLINGUISTIC MEASUREMENT IS

A transparent feature-extraction method - not a black box.

Psycholinguistic measurement maps language to validated psychological categories using explicit, interpretable dictionaries. Every word maps to one or more categories. Every score is computed the same way, every time. No sampling. No inference. No model involved in the scoring.

For an ML audience: think of it as a deterministic, theory-grounded feature-extraction layer - closer in spirit to a well-characterized scientific instrument than to a learned model. The same input yields the same output across runs, versions, and environments.

COGNITIVE

Analytical, thinking, cognitive load, certainty, insight

AFFECTIVE

Emotions, anxiety, sadness, affect

SOCIAL

rapport, affiliation, dominance, authenticity

WELLBEING

Distress signal, inward focus, wellbeing trajectory

INTERPERSONAL

Clout, status, over-reliance, dependency signals

STYLISTIC

Language style matching, formality, deception markers

200+ dimensions across cognitive, affective, social, interpersonal, and stylistic categories, traceable to published science.

LIWC

The most established computational text-analysis tool in psychology and the social sciences.

LIWC - Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count - was created by Dr. Pennebaker and refined over five major versions spanning three decades. The current version, LIWC-22, was developed and validated with per-dimension reliability and validity reporting.

Receptiviti holds the exclusive commercial rights to LIWC. Its measurement dimensions are the foundation of Receptiviti's API.

MEASUREMENT VS. INFERENCE

Why explicit measurement gives you what model inference cannot.

When a model infers psychological state, that inference is never observable - it influences user behavior and thinking without becoming a variable that can be cited, challenged, or audited. Receptiviti produces structured, explicit scores from language that can be.

LLM-BASED INFERENCE

X
 

​​

X​

​​​

​​​

​​​

X

​​

​​​

​​

X

Implicit and unauditable - psychological state influences model behavior without ever becoming an observable variable

Prompt-sensitive and unstable - t
he same conversation yields different inferences across model versions and prompt phrasings

Circular - a
sking the model being evaluated to assess its own impact on the user is not independent measurement

Not citable - i
nference from a prompted model cannot be traced to peer-reviewed science

RECEPTIVITI MEASUREMENT

Why explicit measurement gives you what model inference cannot.
Why explicit measurement gives you what model inference cannot.
Why explicit measurement gives you what model inference cannot.
Why explicit measurement gives you what model inference cannot.

Structured, observable variables - explicitly computed, logged, and auditable

Version-stable - d
erived from validated psycholinguistic frameworks, not from prompt-dependent inference. Same input, same score

Independent - d
erived from language, not from the model being evaluated. No circularity

Every dimension traceable to peer-reviewed science - c
itable in research, product decisions, and accountability conversations
 

The psycholinguistic frameworks behind Receptiviti's science are grounded in the same research tradition that has documented where LLM inference falls short. Demszky et al. (2023), Nature Reviews Psychology - co-authored by Dr. Pennebaker - argues LLMs are not yet ready for the most transformative psychological applications. Receptiviti's measurement layer is the answer that paper calls for: explicit, auditable scores derived from language, not from the model being evaluated.

RESEARCH

Published research, internal studies, and open questions.

Receptiviti's team and academic advisors publish peer-reviewed research on the psychological dimensions of language and human behavior. Receptiviti also conducts its own research and experiments - contributing to the questions AI safety, alignment, and evaluation teams are actively working on.

PUBLISHED: PNAS Nexus, 2024

Large language models display human-like social desirability biases in personality surveys

Salecha, Ireland et al.,2024. Large language models display human-like response biases when they infer they are being evaluated, with effects up to 1.20 human SD across GPT-4, Claude 3, Llama 3, and PaLM-2. Co-authored by Molly Ireland (Receptiviti).

Read the paper →

PUBLISHED: npj Artificial Intelligence · 2026

PsychAdapter: adapting LLMs to reflect traits, personality, and mental health
Vu, Boyd, Eichstaedt et al., 2026. A lightweight LLM architectural modification that generates text reliably reflecting Big Five personality traits (87.3% accuracy) and mental health variables (96.7% accuracy). Co-authored by Ryan Boyd (UT Dallas), academic partner to Receptiviti.

Read the paper →

PUBLISHED: Clinical Psychological Science, 2026

Replicability and validity of a new AI assessment of PTSD from patient language

Kjell, Ganesan, Boyd et al., 2026. AI-based psychological assessment from language, when grounded in validated measurement, produces replicable, clinically meaningful results across sequential evaluation with preregistered models.

Co-authored by Ryan Boyd (UT Dallas), academic advisor to Receptiviti.

​Read the paper →

PREPRINT: arXiv, May 2026, under review

When support escalates distress: regulation and escalation in LLM responses to venting and advice-seeking

Chi, Ganesan, Boyd, Ungar & Guntuku, 2026. Across 178,800 Reddit posts, LLM responses to venting simultaneously regulate and escalate distress — and the escalation is invisible to standard safety evaluations. Therapist personas reduce escalation; friend personas increase both. Measured using LIWC-22. Co-authored by Ryan Boyd (UT Dallas), academic advisor to Receptiviti.

​Read the preprint →

PUBLISHED: npj Mental Health Research, 2025

Psychosocial dynamics of suicidality and nonsuicidal self-injury: a digital linguistic perspective

Entwistle, Hoemann, Nightingale & Boyd, 2025. Large-scale naturalistic study of the language dynamics surrounding suicidality and self-injury in 992 individuals with borderline personality disorder (66,786 posts). Co-authored by Ryan Boyd (UT Dallas), academic advisor to Receptiviti.

​Read the paper →

PUBLISHED: Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2026

Artificial intelligence and the psychology of human connection

Boyd & Markowitz, 2026. Introduces the MIRA model - a theoretical framework for when and how AI functions as a relational entity in human ecosystems. Language is the primary modality through which that relationship operates. Co-authored by Ryan Boyd (UT Dallas), academic advisor to Receptiviti.

​Read the paper →

INTERNAL STUDY

Providing measured user state as context to educational AI

GPT Study Mode: Providing psycholinguistic interaction-state signals produced a +4% improvement in overall educational effectiveness across 25 blinded evaluations. Largest gains in reasoning & scaffolding (+6.3%) and cognitive-load management (+5.9%).

SCOPED

Interaction state as a missing dimension in AI evaluation
The case for human-state signals as a first-class eval criterion alongside accuracy, helpfulness, and harmlessness.

​Research partnerships →

34,000+

Independent peer-reviewed citations to the psycholinguistic science behind these dimensions

30+

Years of foundational research validated across health, personality, social behavior, deception, and clinical contexts

34,000+ citations.

Not a marketing number - a research record.

The psycholinguistic frameworks behind Receptiviti's dimensions are grounded in 34,000+ independent peer-reviewed citations spanning health psychology, clinical research, personality science, organizational behavior, forensic contexts, and deception research.

Every dimension is traceable to published science. That traceability is what makes these scores auditable — and what distinguishes them from inference which can't be cited or challenged.

The foundational methods paper — Tausczik & Pennebaker (2010), "The Psychological Meaning of Words," Journal of Language and Social Psychology — is among the most cited articles in its field.

The measurement layer for the human side of AI.

Research partnerships · API integration · On-prem deployment

bottom of page