Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33392404›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2020

News authentication and tampered images: evaluating the photo-truth impact through image verification algorithms.

Anastasia N Katsaounidou, Antonios Gardikiotis, Nikolaos Tsipas, Charalampos A Dimoulas

Abstract readNews
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anastasia N KatsaounidouMultidisciplinary Media & Mediated Communication Research Group, School of Journalism and Mass Communications, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Antonios GardikiotisMultidisciplinary Media & Mediated Communication Research Group, School of Journalism and Mass Communications, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Nikolaos TsipasMultidisciplinary Media & Mediated Communication Research Group, School of Journalism and Mass Communications, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Charalampos A DimoulasMultidisciplinary Media & Mediated Communication Research Group, School of Journalism and Mass Communications, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Photos have been used as evident material in news reporting almost since the beginning of Journalism. In this context, manipulated or tampered pictures are very common as part of informing articles, in today's misinformation crisis. The current paper investigates the ability of people to distinguish real from fake images. The presented data derive from two studies. Firstly, an online cross-sectional survey (N = 120) was conducted to analyze ordinary human skills in recognizing forgery attacks. The target was to evaluate individuals' perception in identifying manipulated visual content, therefore, to investigate the feasibility of "crowdsourced validation". This last term refers to the process of gathering fact-checking feedback from multiple users, thus collaborating towards assembling pieces of evidence on an event. Secondly, given that contemporary veracity solutions are coupled with both journalistic principles and technology developments, an experiment in two phases was employed: a) A repeated measures experiment was conducted to quantify the associated abilities of Media and Image Experts (N = 5 + 5) in detecting tampering artifacts. In this latter case, image verification algorithms were put into the core of the analysis procedure to examine their impact on the authenticity assessment task. b) Apart from conducting interview sessions with the selected experts and their proper guidance in using the tools, a second experiment was also deployed on a larger scale through an online survey (N = 301), aiming at validating some of the initial findings. The primary intent of the deployed analysis and their combined interpretation was to evaluate image forensic services, offered as real-world tools, regarding their comprehension and utilization by ordinary people, involved in the everyday battle against misinformation. The outcomes confirmed the suspicion that only a few subjects had prior knowledge of the implicated algorithmic solutions. Although these assistive tools often lead to controversial or even contradictory conclusions, their experimental treatment with the systematic training in their proper use boosted the participants' performance. Overall, the research findings indicate that the scores of successful detections, relying exclusively on human observations, cannot be disregarded. Hence, the ultimate challenge for the "verification industry" should be to balance between forensic automations and the human experience, aiming at defending the audience from inaccurate information propagation.

Indexed as

Content authenticationDigital forensicsImage tamperingMisinformationVerification assistance algorithms

Identifiers

PMID33392404
PMCPMC7773588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.