The growing ease with which digital images can be convincingly manipulated and widely distributed on the Internet makes viewers increasingly susceptible to visual misinformation and deception. In situations where ill-intentioned individuals seek to deliberately mislead and influence viewers through fake online images, the harmful consequences could be substantial. We describe an exploratory study of how individuals react, respond to, and evaluate the authenticity of images that accompany online stories in Internet-enabled communications channels. Our preliminary findings support the assertion that people perform poorly at detecting skillful image manipulation, and that they often fail to question the authenticity of images even when primed regarding image forgery through discussion. We found that viewers make credibility evaluation based mainly on non-image cues rather than the content depicted. Moreover, our study revealed that in cases where context leads to suspicion, viewers apply post-hoc analysis to support their suspicions regarding the authenticity of the image.

Despite the ubiquity of images and videos in online news environments, much of the existing research on misinformation and its correction is solely focused on textual misinformation, and little is known about how ordinary users evaluate fake or manipulated images and the most effective ways to label and correct such falsities. We designed a visual forensic label of image authenticity, Picture-O-Meter, and tested the label’s efficacy in relation to its source and placement in an experiment with 2440 participants. Our findings demonstrate that, despite human beings’ general inability to detect manipulated images on their own, image forensic labels are an effective tool for counteracting visual misinformation.

Despite the ubiquity and proliferation of images and videos in online news environments, much of the existing research on misinformation and its correction is solely focused on textual misinformation, and little is known about how ordinary users evaluate fake or manipulated images and the most effective ways to label and correct such falsities. We designed a visual forensic label of image authenticity, Picture-O-Meter, and tested the label's efficacy in relation to its source and placement in an experiment with 2440 participants. Our findings demonstrate that, despite human beings' general inability to detect manipulated images on their own, image forensic labels are an effective tool for counteracting visual misinformation.

Fake or manipulated images propagated through the Web and social media have the capacity to deceive, emotionally distress, and influence public opinions and actions. Yet few studies have examined how individuals evaluate the authenticity of images that accompany online stories. This article details a 6-batch large-scale online experiment using Amazon Mechanical Turk that probes how people evaluate image credibility across online platforms. In each batch, participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 28 news-source mockups featuring a forged image, and they evaluated the credibility of the images based on several features. We found that participants’ Internet skills, photo-editing experience, and social media use were significant predictors of image credibility evaluation, while most social and heuristic cues of online credibility (e.g. source trustworthiness, bandwagon, intermediary trustworthiness) had no significant impact. Viewers’ attitude toward a depicted issue also positively influenced their credibility evaluation.