IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v42y2023i5p478-497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

AI tools for debunking online spam reviews? Trust of younger and older adults in AI detection criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Honglian Xiang
  • Jia Zhou
  • Bingjun Xie

Abstract

In order to make AI tools for spam review detection to be more trustworthy, two types of explanation were designed, the Text-AI tool and the Behaviour-AI tool. The Text-AI tool establishes detection criteria based on the textual features of reviews, while the Behaviour-AI tool establishes detection criteria based on the behavioural features of reviewers. The trust of younger (20–26 years) and older (50–78 years) adults in AI tools and the changes in credibility judgments for reviews and overall attitude toward the product made by them based on AI tools’ detection results were measured. We mainly found that: (i) Almost all the older participants reported that they trust AI tools’ prediction, but 48.7% of them would abandon AI when AI’s prediction was different from their own judgment. (ii) Younger adults showed a higher trust in the Behaviour-AI tool than in the Text-AI tool, especially when the AI tool detected more spam reviews than themselves. (iii) Regardless of age and types of explanation, participants perceived AI tools as more competent and benevolent when AI tools outperformed participants by detecting unexpected spam reviews.

Suggested Citation

  • Honglian Xiang & Jia Zhou & Bingjun Xie, 2023. "AI tools for debunking online spam reviews? Trust of younger and older adults in AI detection criteria," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 478-497, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:42:y:2023:i:5:p:478-497
    DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2021.2024252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144929X.2021.2024252
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144929X.2021.2024252?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:42:y:2023:i:5:p:478-497. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.