[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/mkd6f.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Perceiving AI Intervention Does Not Compromise the Persuasive Effect of Fact-Checking

Author

Listed:
  • Chae, Je Hoon

    (University of California, Los Angeles)

  • Tewksbury, David
Abstract
Efforts to scale up fact-checking through technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI), are increasingly being suggested and tested. This study examines whether previously observed effects of reading fact-checks remain constant when readers are aware of AI’s involvement in the fact-checking process. We conducted three online experiments (N = 3,978), exposing participants to fact-checks identified as either human-generated or AI-assisted, simulating cases where AI fully generates the fact-check or automatically retrieves human fact-checks. Our findings indicate that the persuasive effect of fact-checking, specifically in increasing truth discernment, persists even among participants without a positive prior attitude toward AI. Additionally, in some cases, awareness of AI’s role reduced perceived political bias in fact-checks among Republicans. Finally, neither AI-generated nor human fact-checks significantly affected participants’ feelings toward or their perceptions of the competence of the targeted politicians.

Suggested Citation

  • Chae, Je Hoon & Tewksbury, David, 2024. "Perceiving AI Intervention Does Not Compromise the Persuasive Effect of Fact-Checking," OSF Preprints mkd6f, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:mkd6f
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/mkd6f
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/66e5c3ca14a773c54bfeee67/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/mkd6f?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:mkd6f. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.