arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.28621

Experts Disagree on How to Fight AI Disinformation, but Agree That Health and Politics Need Different Solutions

Alexander Loth·Martin Kappes·Marc-Oliver Pahl
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

When 54 international experts assessed AI-generated disinformation threats, they revealed a surprising pattern: while video deepfakes received the highest average threat ratings in the political domain (M = 6.31/7), the pattern differed in the health domain, where AI-generated text received the highest average rating (M = 5.80). Experts also diverge on what to do: government regulation drew both the most "most effective" (30%) and the most "least effective" (15%) votes, though rating distributions were contested rather than polarized, indicating disagreement over priorities rather than over efficacy. These findings offer an initial expert map of an AI-disinformation landscape that is still rapidly forming.

Explore related subjects

cs.CYcs.HC

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Alexander Loth, Martin Kappes, Marc-Oliver Pahl. 2026-07-29. Experts Disagree on How to Fight AI Disinformation, but Agree That Health and Politics Need Different Solutions. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-205

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.CY subjectcs.HC subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Thinking Inside the Box: Considerations for Putting Data Physicalization Workshops in a Box

Visualization researchers utilize workshops both for applied research and to engage different populations with visualization-based activities. While there are many benefits to running visualization workshops, their utility and impact rely on the presence of a researcher who has deep knowledge about visualization theory and practice. In this work, we introduce workshop-in-a-box as a design concept intended to challenge the researcher-centric approach to data physicalization workshops. Through a design study with a socially innovative organization, we deployed several data physicalization workshops that our collaborator ran instead of us. Based on this experience, along with two accompanying case studies that validate the concept, we present material and procedural considerations for how to put data physicalization workshops into a box and the implications it has for extending visualization research outside the bounds of academia.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Generativism: Toward a Learning Theory for the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence

The four dominant learning theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism show significant conceptual limitations as generative artificial intelligence (AI) proliferates in educational settings. These frameworks were formulated before the emergence of AI systems capable of generating, synthesizing, and reasoning about knowledge. This article critically examines each learning theory and identifies assumptions challenged by the affordances of generative AI. Drawing on research in distributed cognition, extended mind, human-AI collaboration, AI literacy, cognitive offloading, and metacognition, the article proposes Generativism as a learning theory for the generative AI age. Generativism posits that learning increasingly occurs through the iterative co-construction of knowledge between human learners and AI systems. The proposed framework is organized around four constructs (epistemic partnership, distributed agency, generative literacy, and adaptive metacognition) and four principles specifying the relations among them. The framework offers a foundation for rethinking instructional design, learning, assessment, and expertise development in contexts where generative AI plays an integral role in cognition.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

How Mental Health Self-Disclosure Becomes Visible: Evidence from Eight Conditions on Reddit

People share mental health diagnoses on social media, yet how such language becomes visible around their self-disclosure, and whether community engagement tracks it, remain unexamined across conditions. We analyze 89,605 Reddit posts from 739 users across eight conditions, removing each user's diagnosis disclosure and aligning their surrounding posts to that anchor. Within the pre-disclosure year, language-visible burden was highest in the month before disclosure for six conditions, earlier for post-traumatic stress disorder and furthest from it for borderline personality disorder, and remained visible afterward rather than resolving. The theme Seeking Clinical Explanations showed the largest early-to-late difference before disclosure in five conditions, yet engagement rarely tracked what users wrote: only 9 of 360 language--engagement correlations survived correction. Disclosure is therefore a waypoint in an unevenly visible process, and we offer implications for community practice and platform design where engagement metrics do not reflect clinical need.

cs.HC↗