Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Although AI-driven fact-checking has been extensively applied on social media, it is unclear whether presenting AI rather than humans (e.g. social media platform administrators) as a fact-checker will affect people’s credibility perceptions of misinformation. Furthermore, most studies on machine heuristics have mainly focused on the positive machine heuristic and neglected the negative machine heuristic. In this study, a between-subjects online experiment was conducted to address these gaps in knowledge. The results show that presenting AI rather than platform administrators as fact-checkers indirectly led participants to perceive false short-form health videos as more credible via the mediation of the negative machine heuristic rather than the positive machine heuristic. In addition, among participants who initially held a stronger belief in misinformation, the fact-checking provided by AI (vs administrator) generated even more negative machine heuristic, which further led them to perceive the false videos as more credible.

Keywords

AI fact-checking correction credibility assessment health misinformation short-form videos

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Appelman

Sundar

(2016) Measuring message credibility: construction and validation of an exclusive scale. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 93(1): 59–79.

Bai

(2025) Douyin has taken multiple measures to establish a security and trust center, enhance content diversity, and promote algorithm transparency. The Beijing News, 3 January. Available at: https://m.bjnews.com.cn/detail/1735904081129063.html

Bhargava

Macdonald

Newton

, et al. (2023) How effective are TikTok misinformation debunking videos? Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review 4(2): 114.

Bode

Vraga

(2015) In related news, that was wrong: the correction of misinformation through related stories functionality in social media. Journal of Communication 65(4): 619–638.

Bode

Vraga

(2018) See something, say something: correction of global health misinformation on social media. Health Communication 33(9): 1131–1140.

Brewster

Arvanitis

Pavilonis

, et al. (2022) Beware the ‘New Google’: Tiktok’s search engine pumps toxic misinformation to its young users. NewsGuard, 14 September. Available at: https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/september-2022/

Buchanan

(2020) Why do people spread false information online? The effects of message and viewer characteristics on self-reported likelihood of sharing social media disinformation. PLoS ONE 15(10): 1–33.

Chen

Xiao

Kumar

(2023) Spread of misinformation on social media: what contributes to it and how to combat it. Computers in Human Behavior 141: 107643.

CNNIC (2024) The 54th statistical report on China’s internet development. Available at: https://www.cnnic.cn/NMediaFile/2024/0911/MAIN1726017626560DHICKVFSM6.pdf

10.

CNR (2024) Douyin strengthened the governance of false misinformation in 2023. CNR, 19 January. Available at: https://ent.cnr.cn/chuanmei/20240119/t20240119_526563283.shtml

11.

Dietvorst

Simmons

Massey

(2015) Algorithm aversion: people erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 144(1): 1–13.

12.

Douyin Security Center (2022) Announcement of Douyin on upgrading the special management of rumors. Douyin Security Center, 7 March. Available at: https://m.huanqiu.com/article/47MKXWBbNy2

13.

Faul

Buchner

Erdfelder

, et al. (2007a) A short tutorial of GPower. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology 3(2): 51–59.

14.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

, et al. (2007b) G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods 39(2): 175–191.

15.

Flynn

Nyhan

Reifler

(2017) The nature and origins of misperceptions: understanding false and unsupported beliefs about politics. Political Psychology 38: 127–150.

16.

Full Fact (2020) The challenges of online fact checking. Available at: https://fullfact.org/blog/2020/dec/the-challenges-of-online-fact-checking-how-technology-can-and-cant-help/

17.

Graves

(2018) Understanding the promise and limits of automated fact-checking. Available at: https://www.digitalnewsreport.org/publications/2018/factsheet-understanding-promise-limits-automated-fact-checking/

18.

Graves

Amazeen

Graves

, et al. (2019) Fact-checking as idea and practice in journalism. In: Nussbaum J (ed.) Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–16.

19.

Hayes

(2018) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press.

20.

Heiss

Bode

Adisuryo

, et al. (2024) Debunking mental health misperceptions in short-form social media videos: an experimental test of scientific credibility cues. Health Communication 39: 3059–3071.

21.

Huang

Wang

(2023) Is artificial intelligence more persuasive than humans? A meta-analysis. Journal of Communication 73(6): 552–562.

22.

International Fact-Checking Network (2025) An open letter to Mark Zuckerberg from the world’s fact-checkers, nine years later, 9 January. Available at: https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/2025/an-open-letter-to-mark-zuckerberg-from-the-worlds-fact-checkers-nine-years-later/

23.

Jackson

(1992) Message Effects Research: Principles of Design and Analysis. New York: Guilford Press.

24.

Kaplan

(2025) More speech and fewer mistakes. Available at: https://about.fb.com/news/2025/01/meta-more-speech-fewer-mistakes/

25.

Kaye

DBV

Chen

Zeng

(2021) The co-evolution of two Chinese mobile short video apps: parallel platformization of Douyin and TikTok. Mobile Media and Communication 9(2): 229–253.

26.

Kim

(2020) How Do People Process and Share Fake News on Social Media? In the Context of Dual-Process of Credibility With Partisanship, Cognitive Appraisal to Threat, and Corrective Action. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University. Available at: https://surface.syr.edu/thesis/442

27.

Kunda

(1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480–498.

28.

Larsson

Heintz

(2020) Transparency in artificial intelligence. Internet Policy Review 9(2): 1–16.

29.

Lee

(2024) Minding the source: toward an integrative theory of human–machine communication. Human Communication Research 50(2): 184–193.

30.

Lee

Kim

Suh

, et al. (2022) Something’s fishy about it: how opinion congeniality and explainability affect motivated attribution to artificial intelligence versus human comment moderators. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 25(8): 496–503.

31.

Liu

(2021) In AI we trust? Effects of agency locus and transparency on uncertainty reduction in human-AI interaction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 26(6): 384–402.

32.

Liu

Zhang

(2025) Take Back the time that should be mine: the impact of illegitimate tasks on cyberloafing. Journal of Personnel Psychology.

33.

Melendez

(2020) Twitter automatically flags more than half of all tweets that violate its rules. Available at: https://www.fastcompany.com/90528941/twitter-automatically-flags-more-than-half-of-all-tweets-that-violate-its-rules?utm_source=morning_brew

34.

Meta (2020) Here’s how we’re using AI to help detect misinformation. Available at: https://ai.meta.com/blog/heres-how-were-using-ai-to-help-detect-misinformation/

35.

Meta (2021) How meta’s third-party fact-checking program works. Available at: https://www.facebook.com/formedia/blog/third-party-fact-checking-how-it-works

36.

Metzger

Flanagin

(2013) Credibility and trust of information in online environments: the use of cognitive heuristics. Journal of Pragmatics 59: 210–220.

37.

Metzger

Flanagin

Medders

(2010) Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication 60(3): 413–439.

38.

Mian

Khan

(2020) Coronavirus: the spread of misinformation. BMC Medicine 18: 1–2.

39.

Molina

Sundar

(2022a) Does distrust in humans predict greater trust in AI? Role of individual differences in user responses to content moderation. New Media & Society 26: 3638–3656.

40.

Molina

Sundar

(2022b) When AI moderates online content: effects of human collaboration and interactive transparency on user trust. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 27(4): 1–12.

41.

Nir

(2011) Motivated reasoning and public opinion perception. Public Opinion Quarterly 75(3): 504–532.

42.

O’Sullivan

Nason

Manecksha

, et al. (2022) The unintentional spread of misinformation on “TikTok”: a paediatric urological perspective. Journal of Pediatric Urology 18(3): 371–375.

43.

QuestMobile (2023) QuestMobile2023 new media ecological insight. QuestMobile, 21 November. Available at: https://www.digitaling.com/articles/1005199.html

44.

Ren

(2021) Annual inventory: how are short video rumors deceptive? (nianzhong Pandian: Duanshipin Yaoyan Shi Zenme Pianren De?). Shanghai Internet Rumors Debunking, 30 December. Available at: https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_16076297

45.

Sumpter

Neal

(2021) User perceptions of article credibility warnings: towards understanding the influence of journalists and AI agents. ICWSM Workshops. Available at: www.aaai.org

46.

Sundar

(2008) The MAIN Model: a heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In: Metzger

Flanagin

(eds) Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 73–100.

47.

Sundar

(2020) Rise of machine agency: a framework for studying the psychology of Human-AI Interaction (HAII). Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 25(1): 74–88.

48.

Sundar

Molina

Cho

(2021) Seeing is believing: is video modality more powerful in spreading fake news via online messaging apps? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 26(6): 301–319.

49.

Taber

Lodge

(2006) Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50(3): 755–769.

50.

Tandoc

Yao

(2020) Man vs. machine? The impact of algorithm authorship on news credibility. Digital Journalism 8(4): 548–562.

51.

Vraga

Bode

Tully

(2022) The effects of a news literacy video and real-time corrections to video misinformation related to sunscreen and skin cancer. Health Communication 37(13): 1622–1630.

52.

Waddell

(2018) A robot wrote this?: How perceived machine authorship affects news credibility. Digital Journalism 6(2): 236–255.

53.

Waddell

(2019) Can an algorithm reduce the perceived bias of news? Testing the effect of machine attribution on news readers’ evaluations of bias, anthropomorphism, and credibility. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 96(1): 82–100.

54.

Walter

Murphy

(2018) How to unring the bell: a meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation. Communication Monographs 85(3): 423–441.

55.

Wang

Zhang

(2023) Who spread COVID-19 (mis) information online? Differential informedness, psychological mechanisms, and intervention strategies. Computers in Human Behavior 138: 107486.

56.

YouTube (2024a) How does YouTube manage harmful content? Available at: https://www.youtube.com/howyoutubeworks/our-commitments/fighting-misinformation/

57.

YouTube (2024b) YouTube community guidelines enforcement. Available at: https://transparencyreport.google.com/youtube-policy/removals?hl=en&comments_by_source=period:2024Q1&lu=total_removed_videos&total_removed_videos=period:2024Q1;exclude_automated:all

58.

Zhang

Jiang

(2024) Applying the constructive journalism approach to combat Chinese information disorder in the digital age. Journalism and Media 5(4): 1526–1538.

59.

Zhang

(2024) The impact of the “regulations on the governance of online violence information” on user behavior in Chinese social media platforms. Law and Economy 3(11): 23–27.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

5.66 MB

When AI fact-checks false short-form health videos: Effects of AI-driven fact-checking on credibility assessment of the videos

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material