IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2608.01540.html

Do people rely on ChatGPT more than their peers to detect deepfake news?

Author

Listed:
  • Yuhao Fu
  • Nobuyuki Hanaki

Abstract

This experimental study investigates how people rely on different sources of advice when detecting AI-generated fake news (deepfake news). In a laboratory deepfake detection task, student participants identified the proportion of human-written (non-AI-generated) content in synthetic deepfake news articles and received advice from ChatGPT (GPT-4), human peers, or linguistic experts. The results show that participants rely more on ChatGPT than on human peers when detecting GPT-2-generated deepfake news. Participants also rely more on linguistic experts than on peers, while the relative reliance on experts versus ChatGPT is mixed across experimental waves, potentially reflecting time trends in beliefs about AI-based detection. Importantly, in the additional experiment conducted in 2025 under the same experimental procedure, participants relied more on linguistic experts than on ChatGPT. Moreover, performance improvements reflect the joint role of reliance and advice quality, arising primarily when participants rely on high-quality advice. Overall, relying on AI to detect AI-generated deepfakes can improve detection outcomes, but only when AI-based detection tools are of sufficiently high quality. These findings highlight the dual role of GAI as both a source of deepfakes and a tool for mitigating related risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuhao Fu & Nobuyuki Hanaki, 2026. "Do people rely on ChatGPT more than their peers to detect deepfake news?," Papers 2608.01540, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2608.01540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.01540
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yuhao Fu & Nobuyuki Hanaki, 2025. "Paying AI to Detect AI," ISER Discussion Paper 1296, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka.
    2. Marta Serra-Garcia & Uri Gneezy, 2021. "Mistakes, Overconfidence, and the Effect of Sharing on Detecting Lies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(10), pages 3160-3183, October.
    3. Nikhil Agarwal & Alex Moehring & Pranav Rajpurkar & Tobias Salz, 2023. "Combining Human Expertise with Artificial Intelligence: Experimental Evidence from Radiology," NBER Working Papers 31422, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Michael Thaler, 2024. "The Fake News Effect: Experimentally Identifying Motivated Reasoning Using Trust in News," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-38, May.
    5. Tse, Tiffany Tsz Kwan & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Mao, Bolin, 2024. "Beware the performance of an algorithm before relying on it: Evidence from a stock price forecasting experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Aurelia Tamò‐Larrieux & Clement Guitton & Simon Mayer & Christoph Lutz, 2024. "Regulating for trust: Can law establish trust in artificial intelligence?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 780-801, July.
    7. Berkeley J. Dietvorst & Joseph P. Simmons & Cade Massey, 2018. "Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1155-1170, March.
    8. James Heckman, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    9. Erik Brynjolfsson & Danielle Li & Lindsey Raymond, 2025. "Generative AI at Work," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 140(2), pages 889-942.
    10. Connor Larkin & Caitlin Drummond Otten & Joseph Árvai, 2022. "Paging Dr. JARVIS! Will people accept advice from artificial intelligence for consequential risk management decisions?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 407-422, April.
    11. Maggioni, Mario A. & Rossignoli, Domenico, 2023. "If it looks like a human and speaks like a human ... Communication and cooperation in strategic Human–Robot interactions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yuhao Fu & Nobuyuki Hanaki, 2024. "Do people rely on ChatGPT more than their peers to detect deepfake news?," ISER Discussion Paper 1233, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka.
    2. Riccardo Zanardelli, 2025. "The safe harbor paradox: when combining human and AI skills creates or destroys value," Papers 2509.14057, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2026.
    3. Standaert, Thomas & Andries, Petra, 2026. "Overcoming difficulties in knowledge transfer: Harnessing the power of AI to drive process innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    4. Bohren, Noah & Hakimov, Rustamdjan & Lalive, Rafael, 2024. "Creative and Strategic Capabilities of Generative AI: Evidence from Large-Scale Experiments," CEPR Discussion Papers 19507, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    5. Martin Baily & David Byrne & Aidan Kane & Paul Soto, 2025. "Generative AI at the Crossroads: Light Bulb, Dynamo, or Microscope?," Papers 2505.14588, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
    6. Brownback, Andy & Burke, Nathaniel & Gagnon-Bartsch, Tristan, 2024. "Inference from biased polls," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 449-486.
    7. Lingxiao Huang & Wenyang Xiao & Nisheeth K. Vishnoi, 2026. "Delegation and Verification Under AI," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2500, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    8. Liu, Yutian & Tian, Hong, 2026. "Generative artificial intelligence, knowledge search patterns, and circular supply chain dependence reconstruction: A dual path model for performance improvement," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    9. Alexia GAUDEUL & Caterina GIANNETTI, 2023. "Trade-offs in the design of financial algorithms," Discussion Papers 2023/288, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    10. Saurabh Amin & Amine Bennouna & Daniel Huttenlocher & Dingwen Kong & Liang Lyu & Asuman Ozdaglar, 2026. "A Bayesian Framework for Human-AI Collaboration: Complementarity and Correlation Neglect," Papers 2602.14331, arXiv.org.
    11. Grimon, Marie-Pascale & Mills, Christopher, 2025. "Better Together? A Field Experiment on Human-Algorithm Interaction in Child Protection," SOFI Working Papers in Labour Economics 2/2025, Stockholm University, Swedish Institute for Social Research.
    12. L. Elisa Celis & Lingxiao Huang & Nisheeth K. Vishnoi, 2025. "A Mathematical Framework for AI-Human Integration in Work," Papers 2505.23432, arXiv.org, revised May 2025.
    13. Jörg Papenkordt & Johannes Dahlke & Nicolas Neef & Sarah Zabel, 2025. "Exploring the impact of AI on team collaboration dynamics in creative decision-making," Working Papers Dissertations 146, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    14. Bouacida, Elias & Foucart, Renaud & Jalloul, Maya, 2025. "When expert advice fails to reduce the productivity gap: Experimental evidence from chess players," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    15. Chen, Qin & Ge, Jinfeng & Xie, Huaqing & Xu, Xingcheng & Yang, Yanqing, 2025. "Large language models at work in China’s labor market," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    16. Dominik Atella-Suri & Sebastian Kube, 2026. "Cooperation and Coordination When Others May Use AI," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 407, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    17. Foucart, Renaud & Zeng, Fanqi & Wang, Shidong, 2025. "The Social Importance of Being Stubborn When an Organization Meets AI," SocArXiv nfgy3_v1, Center for Open Science.
    18. Guohou Shan & Liangfei Qiu, 2026. "Examining the Impact of Generative AI on Users’ Voluntary Knowledge Contribution: Evidence from a Natural Experiment on Stack Overflow," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 1021-1041, June.
    19. Maxime C. Cohen & Tinglong Dai & Georgia Perakis & Narendra Agrawal & Gad Allon & Robert N. Boute & Gérard P. Cachon & Zhe Chen & Morris Cohen & Rares Cristian & Vinayak Deshpande & Francis de Véricou, 2026. "OM Forum—Supply Chain Management in the AI Era: A Vision Statement from the Operations Management Community," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 687-705, May.
    20. Buchanan, Joy & Hickman, William, 2024. "Do people trust humans more than ChatGPT?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2608.01540. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.