Automated News: Better than expected?

View Researcher's Other Codes

Disclaimer: The provided code links for this paper are external links. Science Nest has no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of these links. Also, by downloading this code(s), you agree to comply with the terms of use as set out by the author(s) of the code(s).

Authors Mario Haim, Andreas Graefe
Journal/Conference Name DIGITAL JOURNALISM
Paper Category
Paper Abstract We conducted two experiments to study people’s prior expectations and actual perceptions of automated and human-written news. We found that, first, participants expected more from human-written news in terms of readability and quality; but not in terms of credibility. Second, participants’ expectations of quality were rarely met. Third, when participants saw only one article, differences in the perception of automated and human-written articles were small. However, when presented with two articles at once, participants preferred human-written news for readability but automated news for credibility. These results contest previous claims according to which expectation adjustment explains differences in perceptions of human-written and automated news.
Date of publication 2017
Code Programming Language R
Comment

Copyright Researcher 2021