RCMN: Understanding Misleadingness in Influential Public Discourse
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Influential public discourse shapes public beliefs and can also mislead, not only through what is stated, but also through how information is framed, omitted, contextualised, and communicated. Yet less research has focused on how such misleadingness arises and shapes the interpretations formed by readers. To address this gap, we introduce Reader-Centric Misleadingness Understanding (RCMN), a framework that operationalises misleadingness through five dimensions: misleading mechanism, likely reader interpretation, evidence-warranted interpretation, emotional arousal, and communicative intent. Based on this framework, we construct an evidence-grounded dataset of influential public discourse. Empirical findings show that misleadingness is diverse and extends well beyond fabrication, with unsupported inference, exaggeration, and omission among the prevalent mechanisms, and is frequently associated with heightened emotional arousal and distortive communicative intent. Moreover, we investigate whether lightweight claim-and-context representations retain sufficient cues for understanding reader-centric misleadingness without access to richer contextual, evidential, and multimodal information. Evaluation across five recent generative foundation models shows that reader-level interpretations can often be recovered from such limited representations, whereas identifying how misleadingness is produced remains considerably more challenging. These findings highlight the potential of lightweight representations for scalable misleadingness analysis, while reliable understanding of misleading mechanisms continues to require richer contextual and evidential grounding.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Aug 2026.
Builds on
21 of 42 references.
References · 21
- 2018FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERificationcited by 1,375
- 2026DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligencecited by 1,040
- 2017"Liar, Liar Pants on Fire": A New Benchmark Dataset for Fake News Detectioncited by 363
- 2018FakeNewsNet: A Data Repository with News Content, Social Context and Spatialtemporal Information for Studying Fake News on Social Mediacited by 285
- 2019MultiFC: A Real-World Multi-Domain Dataset for Evidence-Based Fact Checking of Claimscited by 169
- 2020Generating Fact Checking Explanationscited by 132
- 2021NewsCLIPpings: Automatic Generation of Out-of-Context Multimodal Mediacited by 107
- 2022End-to-End Multimodal Fact-Checking and Explanation Generation: A Challenging Dataset and Modelscited by 107
- 2023The science of fake newscited by 97
- 2022MuMiN: A Large-Scale Multilingual Multimodal Fact-Checked Misinformation Social Network Datasetcited by 61
- 2024FIRE: Fact-checking with Iterative Retrieval and Verificationcited by 39
- 2019GoodNewsEveryone: A Corpus of News Headlines Annotated with Emotions, Semantic Roles, and Reader Perceptioncited by 37
9 more
- 2021Misinfo Reaction Frames: Reasoning about Readers' Reactions to News Headlinescited by 32
- 2024AFaCTA: Assisting the Annotation of Factual Claim Detection with Reliable LLM Annotatorscited by 28
- 2023FACTIFY3M: A Benchmark for Multimodal Fact Verification with Explainability through 5W Question-Answeringcited by 16
- 2020Edited Media Understanding Frames: Reasoning About the Intent and Implications of Visual Misinformationcited by 15
- 2025COVE: COntext and VEracity prediction for out-of-context imagescited by 14
- 2025M4FC: a Multimodal, Multilingual, Multicultural, Multitask Real-World Fact-Checking Datasetcited by 7
- 2026VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checkingcited by 6
- 2026What's Left Unsaid? Detecting and Correcting Misleading Omissions in Multimodal News Previewscited by 3
- 2026MALicious INTent Dataset and Inoculating LLMs for Enhanced Disinformation Detectioncited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.