You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Deepfakes and Disinformation: Exploring the Impact of Synthetic Political Video on Deception, Uncertainty, and Trust in News
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Social Media + Society, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1177/2056305120903408 |
| Authors |
Cristian Vaccari, Andrew Chadwick |
| Abstract |
Artificial Intelligence (AI) now enables the mass creation of what have become known as “deepfakes”: synthetic videos that closely resemble real videos. Integrating theories about the power of visual communication and the role played by uncertainty in undermining trust in public discourse, we explain the likely contribution of deepfakes to online disinformation. Administering novel experimental treatments to a large representative sample of the UK population allowed us to compare people’s evaluations of deepfakes. We find that people are more likely to feel uncertain than to be misled by deepfakes, but this resulting uncertainty, in turn, reduces trust in news on social media. We conclude that deepfakes may contribute toward generalized indeterminacy and cynicism, further intensifying recent challenges to online civic culture in democratic societies |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 96 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 17 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 8% |
| Spain | 4 | 4% |
| Italy | 3 | 3% |
| Greece | 3 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 37 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 54 | 56% |
| Scientists | 38 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 548 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 548 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 51 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 47 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 45 | 8% |
| Researcher | 35 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 26 | 5% |
| Other | 87 | 16% |
| Unknown | 257 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 127 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 46 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 20 | 4% |
| Psychology | 16 | 3% |
| Engineering | 14 | 3% |
| Other | 60 | 11% |
| Unknown | 265 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 368. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 March 2024.
All research outputs
#87,327
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Social Media + Society
#7
of 1,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,400
of 384,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Media + Society
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,104 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 384,867 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.