minor

submission/manuscript.Rmd

@@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ author:
   - name          : "Dominique Makowski"
     affiliation   : "1"
     corresponding : yes    # Define only one corresponding author
-    address       : "HSS 04-18, 48 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore"
-    email         : "[email protected]"
+    address       : "School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton"
+    email         : "[email protected]"
     orcid         : 0000-0001-5375-9967
     role:         # Contributorship roles (e.g., CRediT, https://casrai.org/credit/)
       - "Conceptualization"
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ author:
       - "Visualization"
       - "Writing – original draft"
   - name          : "An Shu Te"  # [email protected]
-    affiliation   : "1"
+    affiliation   : "2"
     orcid         : 0000-0001-8008-2824
     role:
       - "Data curation"
@@ -33,26 +33,26 @@ author:
       - "Investigation"
       - "Writing – original draft"
   - name          : "Stephanie Kirk"  # [email protected]
-    affiliation   : "1"
+    affiliation   : "2"
     orcid         : 0000-0002-9312-5552
     role:
       - "Project administration"
       - "Resources"
       - "Writing – original draft"
   - name          : "Ngoi Zi Liang"  # [email protected]
-    affiliation   : "1"
+    affiliation   : "2"
     role:
       - "Project administration"
       - "Resources"
       - "Writing – review & editing"
-  - name          : "Panagiotis Mavros"  # panos.mavros@sec.ethz.ch 
-    affiliation   : "2"
+  - name          : "Panagiotis Mavros"  # panos.mavros@telecom-paris.fr
+    affiliation   : "3"
     orcid         : 0000-0002-1540-5516
     role:
       - "Supervision"
       - "Writing – review & editing"
   - name          : "S.H. Annabel Chen"  # [email protected]
-    affiliation   : "1, 3, 4, 5"
+    affiliation   : "2, 4, 5, 6"
     orcid         : 0000-0002-1540-5516
     role:
       - "Project administration"
@@ -61,19 +61,21 @@ author:
 affiliation:
 
   - id            : "1"
-    institution   : "School of Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore"
+    institution   : "School of Psychology, University of Sussex, UK"
   - id            : "2"
-    institution   : "Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Télécom Paris, France"
+    institution   : "School of Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore"
   - id            : "3"
-    institution   : "LKC Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore"
+    institution   : "Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Télécom Paris, France"
   - id            : "4"
-    institution   : "National Institute of Education, Singapore"
+    institution   : "LKC Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore"
   - id            : "5"
+    institution   : "National Institute of Education, Singapore"
+  - id            : "6"
     institution   : "Centre for Research and Development in Learning, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore"
 authornote: |
-  Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dominique Makowski, HSS 04-18, 48 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore ([email protected]).
+  Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dominique Makowski ([email protected]).
 abstract: |
-  Technological advances render the distinction between artificial (e.g., computer-generated faces) and real stimuli increasingly difficult, yet the factors driving our beliefs regarding the nature of ambiguous stimuli remain largely unknown. In this study, 150 participants rated 109 pictures of faces on 4 characteristics (attractiveness, beauty, trustworthiness, familiarity). The stimuli were then presented again with the new information that some of them were AI-generated, and participants had to rate each image according to whether they believed them to be real or fake. Strikingly, despite all images being pictures of real faces from the same database, most participants rated a large portion of them as "fake". Moreover, our results suggest a gender-dependent role of attractiveness on reality judgements, with faces rated as more attractive being classified as more real. We also report links between reality beliefs tendencies and dispositional traits such as narcissism and paranoid ideation.
+  Technological advances render the distinction between artificial (e.g., computer-generated faces) and real stimuli increasingly difficult, yet the factors driving our beliefs regarding the nature of ambiguous stimuli remain largely unknown. In this study, 150 participants rated 109 pictures of faces on 4 characteristics (attractiveness, beauty, trustworthiness, familiarity). The stimuli were then presented again with the new information that some of them were AI-generated, and participants had to rate each image according to whether they believed them to be real or fake. Despite all images being pictures of real faces from the same database, most participants did indeed rate a large portion of them as "fake" (often with high confidence), with strong intra- and inter-individual variability. Our results suggest a gender-dependent role of attractiveness on reality judgements, with faces rated as more attractive being classified as more real. We also report links between reality beliefs tendencies and dispositional traits such as narcissism and paranoid ideation.
 
 keywords          : "attractiveness, AI-generated images, fiction, fake news, sense of reality"
 wordcount         : "5242"

submission/manuscript.aux

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+\relax 
+\providecommand\babel@aux[2]{}
+\@nameuse{bbl@beforestart}
+\providecommand\hyper@newdestlabel[2]{}
+\providecommand\HyperFirstAtBeginDocument{\AtBeginDocument}
+\HyperFirstAtBeginDocument{\ifx\hyper@anchor\@undefined
+\global\let\oldnewlabel\newlabel
+\gdef\newlabel#1#2{\newlabelxx{#1}#2}
+\gdef\newlabelxx#1#2#3#4#5#6{\oldnewlabel{#1}{{#2}{#3}}}
+\AtEndDocument{\ifx\hyper@anchor\@undefined
+\let\newlabel\oldnewlabel
+\fi}
+\fi}
+\global\let\hyper@last\relax 
+\gdef\HyperFirstAtBeginDocument#1{#1}
+\providecommand\HyField@AuxAddToFields[1]{}
+\providecommand\HyField@AuxAddToCoFields[2]{}
+\babel@aux{english}{}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\normalfont  \normalsize  \bbl@ensure@english  {Abstract}}{3}{section*.1}\protected@file@percent }
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\normalfont {\textbf  {Too Beautiful to be Fake: Attractive Faces are Less Likely to be Judged as Artificially Generated}}}{4}{section*.2}\protected@file@percent }
+\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {1}{\ignorespaces The decision to believe that an ambiguous stimulus (of any form, e.g., images, text, videos, environments, ...) is real or fake depends of individual characteristics (e.g., personality and cognitive styles), stimulus-related features (context, emotionality), and their interaction, which can manifest for instance in our bodily reaction.\relax }}{6}{figure.caption.3}\protected@file@percent }
+\providecommand*\caption@xref[2]{\@setref\relax\@undefined{#1}}
+\newlabel{fig:unnamed-chunk-2}{{1}{6}{The decision to believe that an ambiguous stimulus (of any form, e.g., images, text, videos, environments, ...) is real or fake depends of individual characteristics (e.g., personality and cognitive styles), stimulus-related features (context, emotionality), and their interaction, which can manifest for instance in our bodily reaction.\relax }{figure.caption.3}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{Methods}{8}{section*.4}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{methods}{{}{8}{Methods}{section*.4}{}}
+\newlabel{ethics-statement}{{}{8}{Ethics Statement}{section*.5}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{Ethics Statement}{8}{section*.5}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{procedure}{{}{8}{Procedure}{section*.6}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{Procedure}{8}{section*.6}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{participants}{{}{10}{Participants}{section*.7}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{Participants}{10}{section*.7}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{data-analysis}{{}{10}{Data Analysis}{section*.8}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{Data Analysis}{10}{section*.8}\protected@file@percent }
+\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces Top part shows the efffect of face ratings on 1) the probability of judging a face as real vs. fake (solid line) and 2) on the confidence associated with that judgement (dashed lines) depending on the sex. Bottom part shows the effect of personality traits on the belief (black line) and the confidence associated with it (colored lines). The points are the average per participant confidence for both types of judgements. Stars indicate significance (p < .001***, p < .01**, p < .05*).\relax }}{12}{figure.caption.9}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{fig:unnamed-chunk-3}{{2}{12}{Top part shows the efffect of face ratings on 1) the probability of judging a face as real vs. fake (solid line) and 2) on the confidence associated with that judgement (dashed lines) depending on the sex. Bottom part shows the effect of personality traits on the belief (black line) and the confidence associated with it (colored lines). The points are the average per participant confidence for both types of judgements. Stars indicate significance (p < .001***, p < .01**, p < .05*).\relax }{figure.caption.9}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{Results}{13}{section*.10}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{results}{{}{13}{Results}{section*.10}{}}
+\newlabel{determinants-of-simulation-monitoring}{{}{13}{Determinants of Simulation Monitoring}{section*.11}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{Determinants of Simulation Monitoring}{13}{section*.11}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{inter-individual-correlates-of-simulation-monitoring}{{}{15}{Inter-Individual Correlates of Simulation Monitoring}{section*.12}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{Inter-Individual Correlates of Simulation Monitoring}{15}{section*.12}\protected@file@percent }
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{Discussion}{16}{section*.13}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{discussion}{{}{16}{Discussion}{section*.13}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{Data Availability}{22}{section*.14}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{data-availability}{{}{22}{Data Availability}{section*.14}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{Funding}{22}{section*.15}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{funding}{{}{22}{Funding}{section*.15}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{Acknowledgments}{22}{section*.16}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{acknowledgments}{{}{22}{Acknowledgments}{section*.16}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{References}{23}{section*.17}\protected@file@percent }
+\newlabel{references}{{}{23}{References}{section*.17}{}}
+\gdef \@abspage@last{32}