Eye-tracking study reveals how people struggle to identify AI-generated images among real ones, indicating implications for information accuracy.
This study investigated human performance in identifying AI-generated images. In a speeded forced-choice task, 255 participants viewed paired images (one real, one AI-generated by Midjourney) of standard or futuristic cars and buildings and had to identify the AI-generated one, while eye movements were recorded using an eye-tracker. Results revealed a powerful “futurism-as-artificiality” heuristic. Specifically, participants performed poorly (55% correct) when an AI-generated standard image was paired with a real futuristic image. Conversely, accuracy was high (91% correct) when the AI-generated futuristic image was paired with a real standard image. Participants’ gaze landed first on the AI-generated image more often when it depicted a futuristic design than when it depicted a standard one. The demonstrated heuristic presents a double-edged sword for information veracity: it may lead to the uncritical acceptance of AI-generated misinformation that appears conventional, while simultaneously causing real forward-thinking designs to be dismissed as fake.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Winter et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: