AI生成新闻质量被认可，披露后短期阅读意愿上升但长期不变
Quality Perceptions and Intended Engagement in Response to AI-Generated and AI-Assisted News
- 对比人类撰写、AI辅助和全AI生成的新闻片段
- 三类新闻在可信度等质量评估上无显著差异
- 告知使用AI后读者更愿继续阅读，但长期意愿未改变
人工智能在新闻生产中的应用日益广泛，引发人们对受众如何感知和回应AI生成新闻的关注。本预先注册的调查实验（样本量N=599，德语瑞士地区）考察了（一）人类撰写、AI辅助和完全由AI生成的新闻片段在可信度、可读性和专业性方面的质量感知差异；（二）在披露AI参与后，自我报告的阅读意愿变化。参与者在知晓文章生成方式前先评估两则短新闻。结果显示，三组新闻在主观质量评价上无显著差异。披露后，AI辅助与全AI生成组的参与者比对照组更愿意继续阅读分配的文章，但未来阅读AI生成新闻的意愿在各组间无差别。总体而言，读者对AI生成与人工撰写的新闻质量评价相当，且揭示AI使用可暂时提升好奇心或兴趣，但尚未影响长期阅读意图。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in news production raises important questions about how audiences perceive and respond to AI-generated journalism. This preregistered survey experiment (N = 599, German-speaking Switzerland) examines (i) perceptions of article quality (measured as credibility, readability, and expertise) across news excerpts that were human-written, AI-assisted, or fully AI-generated, and (ii) self-reported intentions to engage following disclosure of AI involvement. Participants rated two short news excerpts before learning how they had been produced. Articles across all conditions were evaluated similarly in perceived quality. After disclosure, participants in the AI-assisted and AI-generated conditions reported a higher willingness to continue reading their assigned articles compared to the control group, but future willingness to read AI-generated news did not differ across conditions. Overall, the findings suggest that readers assess AI-generated and human-written news comparably in quality, while disclosure of AI use can momentarily increase curiosity or interest without yet changing longer-term reading intentions.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。