Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the impact of biographical personas on code generation in large language models (LLMs) through a controlled experiment involving four prompt conditions across two models. The findings reveal that while the minimalist engineer persona significantly reduced output length without enhancing correctness, the research-librarian persona led to a notable drop in correctness due to eliciting disclaimers and no-code responses. The results suggest that personas influence model behavior in a model-dependent manner, challenging the notion of universal effectiveness in prompt design.
Biographical personas can drastically alter code generation outcomes, with some leading to reduced correctness and others to inefficient verbosity.
Biographical personas are widely used in system prompts, but their effects on code generation are rarely evaluated under controlled, pre-registered conditions. We tested four prompt conditions (no persona, two engineer personas, and a research-librarian persona), 12 code-generation tasks, two frontier models, and five runs per cell (480 completions). Persona effects differed between the two tested models. Under the pre-registered mixed-effects analysis, the condition-by-model interaction was significant for provider-reported output tokens; a post-hoc visible-character measure showed the same qualitative pattern. Six GPT-5.5 completions were length-capped and are reported separately. On Claude Opus, the minimalist engineer persona reduced visible output by 30% (33% in provider tokens) without improving correctness, while the thorough engineer persona increased output without a correctness gain. In an exploratory post-hoc analysis, the librarian persona elicited in-character disclaimers in 55 of 60 Opus responses and 12 genuine no-code responses, lowering mean correctness from 0.92 to 0.67. GPT-5.5 produced neither behavior in its 59 non-truncated responses. These results are consistent with personas acting as Model-Dependent behavioral-policy biases rather than universal quality interventions. We release raw completions, derived scores, analysis artifacts, a pre-registration document, and an execution gate log; end-to-end test-based rescoring requires an unreleased task harness.
