# A Cross-Cultural Assessment of Human Ability to Detect LLM-Generated Fake News about South Africa

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.17682 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.17682/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 16 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Nov 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07258/) (2021)
- [DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvature](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.11305/) (2023)
- [Defending Against Neural Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.12616/) (2019)
- [GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.04043/) (2019)
- [All That's 'Human' Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.00061/) (2021)
- [FakeNewsNet: A Data Repository with News Content, Social Context and Spatialtemporal Information for Studying Fake News on Social Media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.01286/) (2018)
- [Automatic Detection of Machine Generated Text: A Critical Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01314/) (2020)
- [AfriSenti: A Twitter Sentiment Analysis Benchmark for African Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08956/) (2023)
- [Real or Fake Text?: Investigating Human Ability to Detect Boundaries Between Human-Written and Machine-Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.12672/) (2022)
- [Improving short text classification through global augmentation methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.03752/) (2019)
- [Classification of Human- and AI-Generated Texts: Investigating Features for ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.05341/) (2023)
- [Classification of Human- and AI-Generated Texts for English, French, German, and Spanish](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.04882/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This study investigates how cultural proximity affects the ability to detect AI-generated fake news by comparing South African participants with those from other nationalities. As large language models increasingly enable the creation of sophisticated fake news, understanding human detection capabilities becomes crucial, particularly across different cultural contexts. We conducted a survey where 89 participants (56 South Africans, 33 from other nationalities) evaluated 10 true South African news articles and 10 AI-generated fake versions. Results reveal an asymmetric pattern: South Africans demonstrated superior performance in detecting true news about their country (40% deviation from ideal rating) compared to other participants (52%), but performed worse at identifying fake news (62% vs. 55%). This difference may reflect South Africans' higher overall trust in news sources. Our analysis further shows that South Africans relied more on content knowledge and contextual understanding when judging credibility, while participants from other countries emphasised formal linguistic features such as grammar and structure. Overall, the deviation from ideal rating was similar between groups (51% vs. 53%), suggesting that cultural familiarity appears to aid verification of authentic information but may also introduce bias when evaluating fabricated content. These insights contribute to understanding cross-cultural dimensions of misinformation detection and inform strategies for combating AI-generated fake news in increasingly globalised information ecosystems where content crosses cultural and geographical boundaries.