Can The Crowd Identify Misinformation Objectively? The Effects of Judgment Scale and Assessor's Background
Truthfulness judgments are a fundamental step in the process of fighting misinformation, as they are crucial to train and evaluate classifiers that automatically distinguish true and false statements. Usually such judgments are made by experts, like journalists for political statements or medical doctors for medical statements. In this paper, we follow a different approach and rely on (non-expert) crowd workers. This of course leads to the following research question: Can crowdsourcing be reliably used to assess the truthfulness of information and to create large-scale labeled collections for information credibility systems? To address this issue, we present the results of an extensive study based on crowdsourcing: we collect thousands of truthfulness assessments over two datasets, and we compare expert judgments with crowd judgments, expressed on scales with various granularity levels. We also measure the political bias and the cognitive background of the workers, and quantify their effect on the reliability of the data provided by the crowd.
Code (1)
Tasks
MisinformationSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Can the Crowd Judge Truthfulness? A Longitudinal Study on Recent Misinformation about COVID-19
Recently, the misinformation problem has been addressed with a crowdsourcing-based approach: to assess the truthfulness of a statement, instead of relying on a few experts, a crowd of non-expert is exploited. We study wh…
MisinformationThe COVID-19 Infodemic: Can the Crowd Judge Recent Misinformation Objectively?
Misinformation is an ever increasing problem that is difficult to solve for the research community and has a negative impact on the society at large. Very recently, the problem has been addressed with a crowdsourcing-bas…
MisinformationIn Crowd Veritas: Leveraging Human Intelligence To Fight Misinformation
The spread of online misinformation poses serious threats to democratic societies. Traditionally, expert fact-checkers verify the truthfulness of information through investigative processes. However, the volume and immed…
Fact CheckingMisinformationBeyond Seeing Is Believing: On Crowdsourced Detection of Audiovisual Deepfakes
Deepfakes are increasingly realistic and easy to produce, raising concerns about the reliability of human judgments in misinformation settings. We study audiovisual deepfake detection by measuring how consistently crowd …
DeepFake DetectionThe Decoy Dilemma in Online Medical Information Evaluation: A Comparative Study of Credibility Assessments by LLM and Human Judges
Can AI be cognitively biased in automated information judgment tasks? Despite recent progresses in measuring and mitigating social and algorithmic biases in AI and large language models (LLMs), it is not clear to what ex…
Information RetrievalMisinformation