Paper detail

Humans Are Easily Fooled by Digital Images

Digital images are ubiquitous in our modern lives, with uses ranging from social media to news, and even scientific papers. For this reason, it is crucial evaluate how accurate people are when performing the task of identify doctored images. In this paper, we performed an extensive user study evaluating subjects capacity to detect fake images. After observing an image, users have been asked if it had been altered or not. If the user answered the image has been altered, he had to provide evidence in the form of a click on the image. We collected 17,208 individual answers from 383 users, using 177 images selected from public forensic databases. Different from other previously studies, our method propose different ways to avoid lucky guess when evaluating users answers. Our results indicate that people show inaccurate skills at differentiating between altered and non-altered images, with an accuracy of 58%, and only identifying the modified images 46.5% of the time. We also track user features such as age, answering time, confidence, providing deep analysis of how such variables influence on the users' performance.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.