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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andreas Graefe, Nina Bohlken
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