Benchmarking Motivational Interviewing Competence of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.03846v1
• Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2026 08:56:37 GMT
• Title: Benchmarking Motivational Interviewing Competence of Large Language Models
• Authors: Aishwariya Jha, Prakrithi Shivaprakash, Lekhansh Shukla, Animesh Mukherjee, Prabhat Chand, Pratima Murthy,
• Abstract summary: Motivational interviewing (MI) promotes behavioural change in substance use disorders.<n>Its fidelity is measured using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI) framework.<n>We shortlisted 3 proprietary and 7 open-source LLMs from LMArena, evaluated performance using MITI 4.2 framework on two datasets.<n>We conducted a distinguishability experiment with two independent psychiatrists to identify human-vs-LLM responses.
• Score: 3.640688858400333
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Motivational interviewing (MI) promotes behavioural change in substance use disorders. Its fidelity is measured using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI) framework. While large language models (LLMs) can potentially generate MI-consistent therapist responses, their competence using MITI is not well-researched, especially in real world clinical transcripts. We aim to benchmark MI competence of proprietary and open-source models compared to human therapists in real-world transcripts and assess distinguishability from human therapists. Methods: We shortlisted 3 proprietary and 7 open-source LLMs from LMArena, evaluated performance using MITI 4.2 framework on two datasets (96 handcrafted model transcripts, 34 real-world clinical transcripts). We generated parallel LLM-therapist utterances iteratively for each transcript while keeping client responses static, and ranked performance using a composite ranking system with MITI components and verbosity. We conducted a distinguishability experiment with two independent psychiatrists to identify human-vs-LLM responses. Results: All 10 tested LLMs had fair (MITI global scores >3.5) to good (MITI global scores >4) competence across MITI measures, and three best-performing models (gemma-3-27b-it, gemini-2.5-pro, grok-3) were tested on real-world transcripts. All showed good competence, with LLMs outperforming human-expert in Complex Reflection percentage (39% vs 96%) and Reflection-Question ratio (1.2 vs >2.8). In the distinguishability experiment, psychiatrists identified LLM responses with only 56% accuracy, with d-prime: 0.17 and 0.25 for gemini-2.5-pro and gemma-3-27b-it respectively. Conclusion: LLMs can achieve good MI proficiency in real-world clinical transcripts using MITI framework. These findings suggest that even open-source LLMs are viable candidates for expanding MI counselling sessions in low-resource settings.

Related papers

• Automatic Replication of LLM Mistakes in Medical Conversations [0.0]
  We introduce MedMistake, an automatic pipeline that extracts mistakes LLMs make in patient-doctor conversations and converts them into a benchmark of single-shot QA pairs.<n>We release MedMistake-All, a dataset of 3,390 single-shot QA pairs where GPT-5 and Gemini 2.5 Pro are currently failing to answer correctly, as judged by two LLM judges.<n>We found that GPT models, Claude and Grok obtained the best performance on MedMistake-Bench.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-24T06:17:21Z)
• Toward expert-level motivational interviewing for health behavior improvement with LLMs [17.267453197266715]
  Motivational interviewing (MI) is an effective counseling approach for promoting health behavior change, but its impact is constrained by the need for highly trained human counselors.<n>This study developed and evaluated Large Language Models for Motivational Interviewing (MI-LLMs)<n>Three Chinese-capable open-source LLMs were fine-tuned on this corpus and were named as MI-LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-17T13:43:26Z)
• RefineBench: Evaluating Refinement Capability of Language Models via Checklists [71.02281792867531]
  We evaluate two refinement modes: guided refinement and self-refinement.<n>In guided refinement, both proprietary LMs and large open-weight LMs can leverage targeted feedback to refine responses to near-perfect levels within five turns.<n>These findings suggest that frontier LMs require breakthroughs to self-refine their incorrect responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T07:20:52Z)
• Enhancing the Medical Context-Awareness Ability of LLMs via Multifaceted Self-Refinement Learning [49.559151128219725]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in the medical domain, achieving strong performance on several benchmarks.<n>However, they continue to underperform in real-world medical scenarios, which often demand stronger context-awareness.<n>We propose Multifaceted Self-Refinement (MuSeR), a data-driven approach that enhances LLMs' context-awareness along three key facets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-13T08:13:23Z)
• Evaluating LLM Alignment on Personality Inference from Real-World Interview Data [7.061237517845673]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in roles requiring nuanced psychological understanding.<n>Their ability to interpret human personality traits, a critical aspect of such applications, remains unexplored.<n>We introduce a novel benchmark comprising semi-structured interview transcripts paired with validated continuous Big Five trait scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-16T16:54:35Z)
• Let's Use ChatGPT To Write Our Paper! Benchmarking LLMs To Write the Introduction of a Research Paper [64.50822834679101]
  SciIG is a task that evaluates LLMs' ability to produce coherent introductions from titles, abstracts, and related works.<n>We assess five state-of-the-art models, including open-source (DeepSeek-v3, Gemma-3-12B, LLaMA 4-Maverick, MistralAI Small 3.1) and closed-source GPT-4o systems.<n>Results demonstrate LLaMA-4 Maverick's superior performance on most metrics, particularly in semantic similarity and faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T21:11:11Z)
• Improving Automatic Evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) in Biomedical Relation Extraction via LLMs-as-the-Judge [7.064104563689608]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in biomedical relation extraction.<n>This paper investigates the use of LLMs-as-the-Judge as an alternative evaluation method for biomedical relation extraction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-01T02:01:52Z)
• An Empirical Study of Many-to-Many Summarization with Large Language Models [82.10000188179168]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong multi-lingual abilities, giving them the potential to perform Many-to-many summarization (M2MS) in real applications.<n>This work presents a systematic empirical study on LLMs' M2MS ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T11:18:54Z)
• Benchmarking Generative AI for Scoring Medical Student Interviews in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) [0.5434005537854512]
  This study explored the potential of large language models (LLMs) to automate OSCE evaluations using the Master Interview Rating Scale (MIRS)<n>We compared the performance of four state-of-the-art LLMs in evaluating OSCE transcripts across all 28 items of the MIRS under the conditions of zero-shot, chain-of-thought (CoT), few-shot, and multi-step prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-21T04:05:45Z)
• LLM Robustness Against Misinformation in Biomedical Question Answering [50.98256373698759]
  The retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approach is used to reduce the confabulation of large language models (LLMs) for question answering. We evaluate the effectiveness and robustness of four LLMs against misinformation in answering biomedical questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-27T16:23:26Z)
• Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Model Knowledge [78.38870272050106]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been treated as knowledge bases due to their strong performance in knowledge probing tasks. How do we evaluate the capabilities of LLMs to consistently produce factually correct answers? We propose MOdel kNowledge relIabiliTy scORe (MONITOR), a novel metric designed to directly measure LLMs' factual reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T12:40:30Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.