Automated News : Better than expected? 6
By: 4 0 16 [, ] | [, ] |
Contributor(s): Digital Journalism. 5:8 (2017).pp.1044-1059 5 6 [] |
Language: Unknown language code Summary language: Unknown language code Original language: Unknown language code Series: ; 46Edition: Description: Content type: text Media type: unmediated Carrier type: volumeISBN: ISSN: 2Other title: 6 []Uniform titles: | | Subject(s): -- 2 -- 0 -- -- | -- 2 -- 0 -- 6 -- | 2 0 -- | -- -- 20 -- | | -- -- AUTOMATED NEWS -- EXPECTATION-CONFIRMATION -- ROBOT JOURNALISM -- | -- -- -- 20 -- --Genre/Form: -- 2 -- Additional physical formats: DDC classification: | LOC classification: | | 2Other classification:| Item type | Current location | Home library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | Item holds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Book | PLM | PLM Periodicals Section | Periodicals | PN4784.O62.2017 (Browse shelf) | Available | PER2001S |
ABSTRACT : We conducted two experiments to study people's prior expectations and actual perceptions of automated and human - written news. We found that first, participants expected more from human - written news in terms of readability and quality; but not in terms of credibility. Second, participants' expectations of quality were rarely met. Third, when participant saw only one article, differences in the perception of automated and human--written articles were small. However, when presented with two articles at once, participants preffered human-written news foe readability but automated news foe credibility. These results contest previous claims according to which expectation adjustment explains differences in perceptions of human-written and automated news. 56
5
5
There are no comments for this item.