mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Quality Perceptions and Intended Engagement in Response to AI-Generated and AI-Assisted News

arXiv 2409.03500 ↗First posted 5 Sep 2024cs.CY cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in news production raises important questions about how audiences perceive and respond to AI-generated journalism. This preregistered survey experiment (N = 599, German-speaking Switzerland) examines (i) perceptions of article quality (measured as credibility, readability, and expertise) across news excerpts that were human-written, AI-assisted, or fully AI-generated, and (ii) self-reported intentions to engage following disclosure of AI involvement. Participants rated two short news excerpts before learning how they had been produced. Articles across all conditions were evaluated similarly in perceived quality. After disclosure, participants in the AI-assisted and AI-generated conditions reported a higher willingness to continue reading their assigned articles compared to the control group, but future willingness to read AI-generated news did not differ across conditions. Overall, the findings suggest that readers assess AI-generated and human-written news comparably in quality, while disclosure of AI use can momentarily increase curiosity or interest without yet changing longer-term reading intentions.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 0 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Sep 2024.

Builds on

0 of 39 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.