Does the Source of a Warning Matter? Examining the Effectiveness of Veracity Warning Labels Across Warners

In this study, we conducted an online, between-subjects experiment (N = 2,049) to better understand the impact of warning label sources on information trust and sharing intentions. Across four warners (the social media platform, other social media users, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and fact checkers), we found that all significantly decreased trust in false information relative to control, but warnings from AI were modestly more effective. All warners significantly decreased the sharing intentions of false information, except warnings from other social media users. AI was again the most effective. These results were moderated by prior trust in media and the information itself. Most noteworthy, we found that warning labels from AI were significantly more effective than all other warning labels for participants who reported a low trust in news organizations, while warnings from AI were no more effective than any other warning label for participants who reported a high trust in news organizations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
Published
2025-06-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v19i1.35848
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Safety Warnings and Signage
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.44
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does the Source of a Warning Matter? Examining the Effectiveness of Veracity Warning Labels Across Warners

Benjamin D. Horne
1 citations
Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
Safety Warnings and Signage
2.44
article

Does the Source of a Warning Matter? Examining the Effectiveness of Veracity Warning Labels Across Warners

Benjamin D. Horne
article en
1 citations

Abstract

In this study, we conducted an online, between-subjects experiment (N = 2,049) to better understand the impact of warning label sources on information trust and sharing intentions. Across four warners (the social media platform, other social media users, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and fact checkers), we found that all significantly decreased trust in false information relative to control, but warnings from AI were modestly more effective. All warners significantly decreased the sharing intentions of false information, except warnings from other social media users. AI was again the most effective. These results were moderated by prior trust in media and the information itself. Most noteworthy, we found that warning labels from AI were significantly more effective than all other warning labels for participants who reported a low trust in news organizations, while warnings from AI were no more effective than any other warning label for participants who reported a high trust in news organizations.

Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social MediaVol. 19
University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Safety Warnings and Signage
2.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Does the Source of a Warning Matter? Examining the Effectiveness of Veracity Warning Labels Across Warners — Benjamin D. Horne · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS