Disclosure of AI-Generated News Increases Engagement but Does Not Reduce Aversion, Despite Positive Quality Ratings

Overview

• AI-generated news disclosure increases engagement but does not reduce aversion, despite positive quality ratings
• Experiment tested user perceptions and reactions to AI-generated news articles with and without disclosure
• Findings suggest that while AI-generated news is rated as high quality, readers still prefer human-written content

Plain English Explanation

The paper explores how readers react to news articles that are generated by artificial intelligence (AI) rather than written by humans. The researchers conducted an experiment where they showed people news articles and told some of them that the articles were written by AI and others that they were written by humans.

The key findings are:

• When people were told the articles were AI-generated, they engaged with them more (e.g. spent more time reading, shared the articles more). This suggests AI-generated news can be effective at grabbing readers' attention.

• However, even though the AI-generated articles were rated as high quality, people still expressed more aversion to them compared to the human-written articles. They preferred the human-written content overall.

So while disclosure of AI authorship increased engagement, it did not overcome people's underlying preference for news written by other humans. The researchers conclude that despite the high quality of AI-generated news, readers still harbor skepticism and mistrust towards content created by machines rather than people.

Technical Explanation

The researchers conducted a series of experiments to investigate how disclosure of AI authorship affects perceptions and engagement with news articles. In the first study, participants read either an AI-generated or human-written news article and were asked to rate the quality, accuracy, and their overall preference for the article. The results showed that participants rated the AI-generated and human-written articles as equally high in quality and accuracy, but still expressed a stronger preference for the human-written content.

In the second study, the researchers added an authorship disclosure condition, where some participants were told the article was AI-generated before reading it. The results indicated that disclosure of AI authorship led to increased engagement metrics like reading time and sharing, but did not reduce the underlying aversion towards AI-generated content. Participants still preferred the human-written articles, even when the AI articles were rated as high quality.

The researchers suggest this reveals a tension between the objective quality of AI-generated news and people's subjective preference for human-written content. Even when AI systems produce high-quality news, there appears to be an inherent human bias towards trusting information from other humans rather than machines.

Critical Analysis

The research provides valuable insight into how readers perceive and engage with AI-generated news. The findings highlight an important challenge - while AI systems may be capable of producing high-quality news content, the public may be hesitant to fully embrace it due to underlying skepticism and preference for human-written information.

One potential limitation is that the experiments used relatively short news articles. Readers' perceptions and engagement patterns may differ for longer, more in-depth journalism produced by AI. Additionally, the study was conducted in a controlled lab environment, so real-world reader behavior in a naturalistic news consumption setting could vary.

Further research is needed to better understand the factors driving this human bias against AI-generated content. Exploring how trust, credibility, and emotional connections influence readers' attitudes would provide deeper insight. Investigating whether this effect holds true across different demographics, news topics, and presentation formats could also yield important nuances.

Ultimately, this research suggests the need for news publishers and AI developers to carefully consider how to build public trust and acceptance of AI-generated news, perhaps through enhanced disclosure, education, or other strategies. The quality of the content alone may not be enough to overcome inherent human preferences.

Conclusion

This study illuminates a key challenge in the development and deployment of AI-generated news - even when the content is rated as high quality, readers still exhibit a persistent preference for information created by other humans. The findings indicate that simply disclosing AI authorship can increase engagement, but does not effectively address the underlying aversion. As AI systems become more advanced at producing news, further research and strategies will be needed to bridge this gap between technological capabilities and human trust.