This meta-analysis summarizes evidence on how readers perceive the credibility, quality, and readability of automated news in comparison to human-written news. Overall, the results, which are based on experimental and descriptive evidence from 12 studies with a total of 4,473 participants, showed no difference in readers’ perceptions of credibility, a small advantage for human-written news in terms of quality, and a huge advantage for human-written news with respect to readability. Experimental comparisons further suggest that participants provided higher ratings for credibility, quality, and readability simply when they were told that they were reading a human-written article. These findings may lead news organizations to refrain from disclosing that a story was automatically generated, and thus underscore ethical challenges that arise from automated journalism.

中文翻译：

---

自动化新闻：与自动新闻相比，读者对人工写作的看法进行荟萃分析

这项荟萃分析总结了与人工新闻相比，读者如何看待自动化新闻的可信度，质量和可读性的证据。总体而言，该结果基于来自12个研究的实验和描述性证据，共有4,473名参与者，显示出读者对信誉的看法没有差异，就质量而言，人工撰写新闻的优势不大，而且优势巨大。有关可读性的人工新闻。实验比较还表明，仅在被告知正在阅读人工撰写的文章时，参与者才能对信誉，质量和可读性提供更高的评分。这些发现可能会使新闻机构避免披露新闻是自动产生的，