English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Fact-checking is a popular countermeasure against misinformation but themassive volume of information online has spurred active research in theautomation of the task. Like expert fact-checking, it is not enough for anautomated fact-checker to just be accurate, but also be able to inform andconvince the user of the validity of its prediction. This becomes viable withexplainable artificial intelligence (XAI). In this work, we conduct a study ofXAI fact-checkers involving 180 participants to determine how users' actionstowards news and their attitudes towards explanations are affected by the XAI.Our results suggest that XAI has limited effects on users' agreement with theveracity prediction of the automated fact-checker and on their intents to sharenews. However, XAI does nudge them towards forming uniform judgments of newsveracity, thereby signaling a reliance on the explanations. We also foundpolarizing preferences towards XAI, raising several design considerations onthese.

XAI in Automated Fact-Checking? The Benefits Are Modest And There's No One-Explanation-Fits-All