AI写作财经评论能否匹配人类记者的专业度?——基于HSM模型的在线实验分析

陆泓承

国际新闻界 ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (10) : 27-48.

PDF(1630 KB)
PDF(1630 KB)
国际新闻界 ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (10) : 27-48.
本期话题/新技术条件下的新闻生产

AI写作财经评论能否匹配人类记者的专业度?——基于HSM模型的在线实验分析

作者信息 +

Can AI Match the Expertise of Financial Journalist in Writing News Commentary? An Online Experimental Analysis Based on the Heuristic-Systematic Model

Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

过去,AI写作在新闻生产中通常被用于主观性、逻辑性较弱的新闻体裁。然而,随着近来AI能力的提升,AI写作能否被扩展到更具主观性、创意性的新闻生产环节当中引发了讨论。财经评论兼具结构性、主观性和逻辑性,其本身也是用以探究AI写作应用边界的一类较为合适的新闻体裁。基于系统化-启发式(HSM)模型,本研究通过两组情境实验考察了AI作为评论作者对财经评论感知专业度的影响及其具体作用机制。研究一在未提示受众关注作者的情况下,探讨了受众对AI生成与人类撰写的财经评论之间感知专业度的差异。结果显示,当受众通过系统化处理路径阅读财经评论时,很难区分AI与人类记者撰写的评论在专业度上的差异。研究二采用2(实际作者:人类 vs. AI)× 3(作者署名:人类记者 VS. AI VS. 不署名)因子设计,通过在线实验探讨启发式处理路径下,受众对不同作者的财经评论的差异化感知机制。结果表明,当受众注意到评论的作者身份时,署名为AI的财经评论可以通过权威启发式(authority heuristic)和机器启发式(machine heuristic)提高内容的感知专业度,而受众对AI写作的态度能够有效增强机器启发对内容感知专业度的提升作用。但是,署名与否则会降低受众的权威启发式水平进而折损受众对于内容的专业度感知。结合两研究来看,过往专业财经媒体赖以生存的权威性、专业性在当前的AI时代也开始面临着极大挑战。因此,应对AI写作的冲击有必要充分重建财经媒体的权威性和专业性。

Abstract

With recent advancements in generative AI, there is a discussion about whether AI writing can be further applied to news production that requires more opinions and creativity. Economic and financial news commentary, which is a typical genre of economic journalism characterized by standardization, subjectivity, logicality, serves as an apt news genre to explore the application boundaries of AI writing. Based on the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM), this study investigated the impact of AI involvement in the production of financial commentary on the perceived expertise of the content through two sets of scenario experiments (N1=110; N2=582). Study 1 examined the perceived expertise differences between AI-generated and human-written financial commentary without prompting the audience to pay attention to the author. The results indicated that when readers processed the financial commentary vias systematic approach, they found it difficult to distinguish the expertise level between content written by AI and that by human journalists. Study 2 employed a 2 (actual author: human vs. AI) × 3 (author attribution: human journalist vs. AI vs. anonymous) online experiment, to explore the mechanisms of the different perception of financial commentary written by different author under heuristic processing. The findings showed that when the audience was aware of the author's identity, financial commentary attributed to AI could enhance perceived expertise through authority heuristics and machine heuristics. Moreover, the audience’s attitude toward AI writing significantly strengthened the effect of machine heuristics on perceived content expertise. Considering the research conclusions, the authority and expertise that professional financial media have relied on to survive are also facing great challenges in the current AI era. Therefore, it is necessary to fully rebuild the authority and expertise of financial media to cope with the impact of AI writing.

关键词

财经新闻评论 / AI写作 / 感知专业度 / HSM模型

Key words

Financial and economic commentary / AI writing / expertise / economic journalism

引用本文

导出引用
陆泓承. AI写作财经评论能否匹配人类记者的专业度?——基于HSM模型的在线实验分析[J]. 国际新闻界. 2024, 46(10): 27-48
LU Hongcheng. Can AI Match the Expertise of Financial Journalist in Writing News Commentary? An Online Experimental Analysis Based on the Heuristic-Systematic Model[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2024, 46(10): 27-48

参考文献

[1]
陈阳(2014). 从“不专业”到“专业”:体制外记者与媒体机构的冲突. 《国际新闻界》,(6),16-28.
[2]
陈阳, 李宛真, 张喆喆(2023). 数字新闻消费与人机关系——一项关于阅读机器人新闻的在线实验. 《新闻记者》,(8),40-50+85.
[3]
程萧潇(2019). 场景效应还是内容效应?——财经新闻、网络舆情对股市行情的实证检验. 《统计与信息论坛》,(7),69-75.
[4]
付晓光, 吴雨桐(2021). 论AI新闻写作的逻辑特征——基于Dreamwriter报道与人工报道的对比分析. 《现代出版》,(1),48-55.
[5]
郝雨, 文希(2023). AI嵌入新闻生产的强势与限度——人机关系视域下ChatGPT与记者的新闻职业主场争夺. 《编辑之友》,(11),52-58.
[6]
蒋忠波, 师雪梅, 张宏博(2022). 人机传播视域下算法新闻可信度的感知研究——基于一项对大学生的控制实验分析. 《国际新闻界》,(3),34-52.
[7]
李华林(2023). 财经评论写作的专业逻辑建构. 《新闻前哨》,(19),38-39.
[8]
牟怡, 夏凯, Novozhilova E., 许坤(2019). 人工智能创作内容的信息加工与态度认知——基于信息双重加工理论的实验研究. 《新闻大学》,(8),30-43+121-122.
[9]
史安斌, 刘勇亮(2023). 从媒介融合到人机协同:AI赋能新闻生产的历史、现状与愿景. 《传媒观察》,(6),36-43+32.
[10]
谢湖伟, 简子奇, 沈欣怡(2023). 认知框架视角下AIGC对媒体融合的影响研究——对30位媒体融合从业者的深度访谈. 《新闻与传播评论》,(6),5-18.
[11]
徐静君, 徐涛(2017). 财经新闻节目专业性与民生性融合研究. 《当代电视》,(9),105-106.
[12]
许雪晨, 田侃, 李文军(2023). 新一代人工智能技术(AIGC):发展演进、产业机遇及前景展望. 《产业经济评论》,(4),5-22.
[13]
姚琦, 周赟(2022). 主观还是客观:AI写作对新闻可信度的影响机制研究. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(10),127-135+145.
[14]
张弩, 周宇翔, 杨恬(2023). AI技术在财经新闻生产中的应用研究. 《中国传媒科技》,(6),17-21.
[15]
朱小沛(2018). 人工智能背景下财经新闻的“去专业化”. 《青年记者》(27),36-37.
[16]
Alyukov M. (2023). Harnessing distrust: News, credibility heuristics, and war in an authoritarian regime. Political Communication, 40(5), 527-554.
[17]
Carlson M. (2015). The Robotic Reporter: Automated journalism and the redefinition of labor, compositional forms, and journalistic authority. Digital Journalism, 3(3), 416-431.
[18]
Carlson M. (2018). Automating judgment? Algorithmic judgment, news knowledge, and journalistic professionalism. New Media & Society, 20(5), 1755-1772.
Journalistic judgment is both a central and fraught function of journalism. The privileging of objectivity norms and the externalization of newsworthiness in discourses about journalism leave little room for the legitimation of journalists’ subjective judgment. This tension has become more apparent in the digital news era due to the growing use of algorithms in automated news distribution and production. This article argues that algorithmic judgment should be considered distinct from journalists’ professional judgment. Algorithmic judgment presents a fundamental challenge to news judgment based on the twin beliefs that human subjectivity is inherently suspect and in need of replacement, while algorithms are inherently objective and in need of implementation. The supplanting of human judgment with algorithmic judgment has significant consequences for both the shape of news and its legitimating discourses.
[19]
Flanagin A. J., & Metzger M. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(3), 515-540.
[20]
Flanagin A. J., & Metzger M. J. (2003). The perceived credibility of personal Web page information as influenced by the sex of the source. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 683-701.
[21]
Gutsche R. E. (2015). Boosterism as Banishment Identifying the power function of local, business news and coverage of city spaces. Journalism Studies, 16(4), 497-512.
[22]
Hilligoss B., & Rieh S. Y. (2008). Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: Construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Information Processing & Management, 44(4), 1467-1484.
[23]
Iddins A. (2021). Economic Life: global capital, financial journalism, and independent media. Media Culture & Society, 43(4), 716-732.
[24]
Jung J., Song H., Kim Y., Im H., Oh S. (2017). Intrusion of software robots into journalism: The public’s and journalists’ perceptions of news written by algorithms and human journalists. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 291-298.
[25]
Liu B., & Wei L. (2019). Machine authorship in situ: Effect of news organization and news genre on news credibility. Digital Journalism, 7(5), 635-657.
[26]
Longoni C., & Cian L. (2022). Artificial intelligence in utilitarian vs. hedonic contexts: The “word-of-machine” effect. Journal of Marketing, 86(1), 91-108.
[27]
Ohanian R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39-52.
[28]
Rijo A., & Waldzus S. (2023). That’s interesting! The role of epistemic emotions and perceived credibility in the relation between prior beliefs and susceptibility to fake-news. Computers in Human Behavior, 141, 107619.
[29]
Sundar S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. Cambridge, MA: MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Initiative.
[30]
Tandoc Jr E. C., Yao L. J., Wu S. (2020). Man vs. machine? The impact of algorithm authorship on news credibility. Digital Journalism, 8(4), 548-562.
[31]
Waddell T. F. (2018). A Robot Wrote This? How perceived machine authorship affects news credibility. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 236-255.
[32]
Waddell T. F. (2019a). Attribution practices for the man-machine marriage: How perceived human intervention, automation metaphors, and byline location affect the perceived bias and credibility of purportedly automated content. Journalism Practice, 13(10), 1255-1272.
[33]
Waddell T. F. (2019b). Can an algorithm reduce the perceived bias of news? Testing the effect of machine attribution on news readers’ evaluations of bias, anthropomorphism, and credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96(1), 82-100.
[34]
Zhang Y. Z., Sun H., Gao G., Shou L. D., Wu D. (2022). Developing spatio-temporal approach to predict economic dynamics based on online news. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 16158.

PDF(1630 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/