Do people rely on ChatGPT more than their peers to detect deepfake news?
arXiv:2608.01540v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This experimental study investigates how people rely on different sources of advice when detecting AI-generated fake news (deepfake news). In a laboratory deepfake detection task, student participants identified the proportion of human-written (non-AI-generated) content in synthetic deepfake news articles and received advice from ChatGPT (GPT-4), human peers, or linguistic experts. The results show that participants rely more on ChatGPT than on h
Record details
Published: 4 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Misinformation · Children & education · Finance, VC & PE
Retrieved: 4 August 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Knowing the Rules Is Not Enough: Student Regulatory Awareness and Use of GenAI in Higher Education
arXiv · 16 May 2026
Reimagining Assessment in the Age of Generative AI: Lessons from Open-Book Exams with ChatGPT
arXiv · 12 May 2026
Incorporating AI in foreign language education: An investigation into ChatGPT’s effect on foreign language learners
OpenAlex · 19 March 2024
A multinational study on the factors influencing university students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT
OpenAlex · 23 January 2024
The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: a case of ChatGPT and Midjourney
OpenAlex · 4 September 2023
New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Towards a Sustainable Multifaceted Revolution
OpenAlex · 16 August 2023
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (4 August 2026), “Do people rely on ChatGPT more than their peers to detect deepfake news?,” evidence record 15835, https://ethics.ai/record/15835 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.