ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Analyzing the persuasion mechanism of AI-generated rumors via the elaboration likelihood model.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dual paths of information behavioral choice influenced by information and emotion: The moderating effect of user credibility.PloS one · 2026Article
- Does negative marriage discourse on social media deter marriage? Evidence from Weibo users in urban China.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While the technological advancements of Generative Artificial Intelligence are widely recognized, how they reshape the psychological mechanisms of human persuasion and information processing remains underexplored. This study addresses this gap by examining the persuasion mechanisms of AI-generated rumors on internet users, drawing on the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). Methods: A systematic content analysis was conducted on a large dataset of 11,942 online comments responding to various AI-generated rumors. Using an established coding scheme and a reliability testing procedure, each comment was classified as indicative of either central or peripheral route processing. Results: The analysis reveals that 90.5% of the comments demonstrated peripheral route processing, with emotional expression as the primary indicator. Only 9.5% of the comments reflected central route processing, most of which involved users providing reasons or evidence, or questioning the source. Discussion: We argue that the "technological realism" of AI-generated content plays a key role in this pattern. It diminishes users' ability and motivation to engage in deeper cognitive elaboration, leading them to rely predominantly on the peripheral route for persuasion. These findings extend the Elaboration Likelihood Model to the age of AI and offer practical insights for online platform management, cybersecurity enhancement, and public education in digital literacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.