Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News
This meta-analysis summarizes evidence on how readers perceive the credibility, quality, and readability of automated news in comparison to human-written news. Overall, the results, which are based on experimental and descriptive evidence from 12 studies with a total of 4,473 participants, showed no...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Cogitatio
2020-07-01
|
Series: | Media and Communication |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/3019 |
id |
doaj-a82143b84e0f43c3896ced1b300fd6b9 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-a82143b84e0f43c3896ced1b300fd6b92020-11-25T03:42:14ZengCogitatioMedia and Communication2183-24392020-07-0183505910.17645/mac.v8i3.30191532Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated NewsAndreas Graefe0Nina Bohlken1Business Faculty, Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, GermanyBusiness Faculty, Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, GermanyThis meta-analysis summarizes evidence on how readers perceive the credibility, quality, and readability of automated news in comparison to human-written news. Overall, the results, which are based on experimental and descriptive evidence from 12 studies with a total of 4,473 participants, showed no difference in readers’ perceptions of credibility, a small advantage for human-written news in terms of quality, and a huge advantage for human-written news with respect to readability. Experimental comparisons further suggest that participants provided higher ratings for credibility, quality, and readability simply when they were told that they were reading a human-written article. These findings may lead news organizations to refrain from disclosing that a story was automatically generated, and thus underscore ethical challenges that arise from automated journalism.https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/3019automated newscomputational journalismcredibilityjournalismmeta-analysisperceptionqualityreviewrobot journalism |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Andreas Graefe Nina Bohlken |
spellingShingle |
Andreas Graefe Nina Bohlken Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News Media and Communication automated news computational journalism credibility journalism meta-analysis perception quality review robot journalism |
author_facet |
Andreas Graefe Nina Bohlken |
author_sort |
Andreas Graefe |
title |
Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News |
title_short |
Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News |
title_full |
Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News |
title_fullStr |
Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News |
title_full_unstemmed |
Automated Journalism: A Meta-Analysis of Readers’ Perceptions of Human-Written in Comparison to Automated News |
title_sort |
automated journalism: a meta-analysis of readers’ perceptions of human-written in comparison to automated news |
publisher |
Cogitatio |
series |
Media and Communication |
issn |
2183-2439 |
publishDate |
2020-07-01 |
description |
This meta-analysis summarizes evidence on how readers perceive the credibility, quality, and readability of automated news in comparison to human-written news. Overall, the results, which are based on experimental and descriptive evidence from 12 studies with a total of 4,473 participants, showed no difference in readers’ perceptions of credibility, a small advantage for human-written news in terms of quality, and a huge advantage for human-written news with respect to readability. Experimental comparisons further suggest that participants provided higher ratings for credibility, quality, and readability simply when they were told that they were reading a human-written article. These findings may lead news organizations to refrain from disclosing that a story was automatically generated, and thus underscore ethical challenges that arise from automated journalism. |
topic |
automated news computational journalism credibility journalism meta-analysis perception quality review robot journalism |
url |
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/3019 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT andreasgraefe automatedjournalismametaanalysisofreadersperceptionsofhumanwrittenincomparisontoautomatednews AT ninabohlken automatedjournalismametaanalysisofreadersperceptionsofhumanwrittenincomparisontoautomatednews |
_version_ |
1724526324928741376 |