Simulating Professions (SP) enables Large Language Models (LLMs) to emulate professional roles. However, comprehensive psychological and ethical evaluation in these contexts remains lacking. This paper introduces EMNLP, an Educator-role Moral and Normative LLMs Profiling framework for personality profiling, moral development stage measurement, and ethical risk under soft prompt injection. EMNLP extends existing scales and constructs 88 teacher-specific moral dilemmas, enabling profession-oriented comparison with human teachers. A targeted soft prompt injection set evaluates compliance and vulnerability in teacher SP. Experiments on 14 LLMs show teacher-role LLMs exhibit more idealized and polarized personalities than human teachers, excel in abstract moral reasoning, but struggle with emotionally complex situations. Models with stronger reasoning are more vulnerable to harmful prompt injection, revealing a paradox between capability and safety. The model temperature and other hyperparameters have limited influence except in some risk behaviors. This paper presents the first benchmark to assess ethical and psychological alignment of teacher-role LLMs for educational AI. Resources are available at https://e-m-n-l-p.github.io/.

Recent research has focused on investigating the psychological characteristics of Large Language Models (LLMs), emphasizing the importance of comprehending their behavioral traits. Likert scale personality questionnaires have become the primary tool for assessing these characteristics in LLMs. However, such scales can be skewed by factors such as social desirability, distorting the assessment of true personality traits. To address this issue, we firstly incorporate the forced-choice test, a method known for reducing response bias in human personality assessments, into the evaluation of LLM. Specifically, we evaluated six LLMs: Llama-3.1-8B, GLM-4-9B, GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4o, Claude-3.5-sonnet, and Deepseek-V3. We compared the Likert scale and forced-choice test results for LLMs’ Big Five personality scores, as well as their reliability. In addition, we looked at how temperature parameter and language affected LLM personality scores. The results show that the forced-choice test better captures differences between LLMs across various personality dimensions and is less influenced by temperature parameters. Furthermore, we found both broad trends and specific variations in personality scores across models and languages.