Can The Crowd Identify Misinformation Objectively? The Effects of Judgment Scale and Assessor's Background
원문 초록
Truthfulness judgments are a fundamental step in the process of fighting misinformation, as they are crucial to train and evaluate classifiers that automatically distinguish true and false statements. Usually such judgments are made by experts, like journalists for political statements or medical doctors for medical statements. In this paper, we follow a different approach and rely on (non-expert) crowd workers. This of course leads to the following research question: Can crowdsourcing be reliably used to assess the truthfulness of information and to create large-scale labeled collections for information credibility systems? To address this issue, we present the results of an extensive study based on crowdsourcing: we collect thousands of truthfulness assessments over two datasets, and we compare expert judgments with crowd judgments, expressed on scales with various granularity levels. We also measure the political bias and the cognitive background of the workers, and quantify their effect on the reliability of the data provided by the crowd.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Remember Past, Anticipate Future: Learning Continual Multimodal Misinformation Detectors
Robustness of Misinformation Classification Systems to Adversarial Examples Through BeamAttack
Persona-Assigned Large Language Models Exhibit Human-Like Motivated Reasoning
RealFactBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Real-World Fact-Checking
SUCEA: Reasoning-Intensive Retrieval for Adversarial Fact-checking through Claim Decomposition and Editing
SocialDF: Benchmark Dataset and Detection Model for Mitigating Harmful Deepfake Content on Social Media Platforms
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.