AI-generated content has grown significantly in recent years. Today, AI-generated and human-made images coexist across various settings, including news media, social platforms, and beyond. However, we still know relatively little about how audiences interpret and evaluate these different types of images. The goal of this study was to examine whether image interpretation is influenced by the origin of the image (AI-generated vs. human-made). Additionally, we aimed to explore whether visual professionalization influences how images are interpreted. To this end, we presented 24 AI-generated images (produced using Midjourney, DALL·E, and Firefly) and 8 human-made images to 161 participants—71 visual professionals and 90 non-professionals. Participants were asked to evaluate each image based on the following: (1) the source they believed the image originated from, (2) the level of realism, and (3) the level of credibility they attributed to it. A total of 5152 responses were collected for each question. Our results reveal that human-made images are more readily recognized as such, whereas AI-generated images are frequently misclassified as human-made. We also find that human-made images are perceived as both more realistic and more credible than AI-generated ones. We conclude that individuals are generally unable to accurately determine the source of an image, which in turn affects their assessment of its credibility.

While movie edition creates a discontinuity in audio-visual works for narrative and economy-of-storytelling reasons, eyeblink creates a discontinuity in visual perception for protective and cognitive reasons. We were interested in analyzing eyeblink rate linked to cinematographic edition styles. We created three video stimuli with different editing styles and analyzed spontaneous blink rate in participants (N = 40). We were also interested in looking for different perceptive patterns in blink rate related to media professionalization. For that, of our participants, half (n = 20) were media professionals, and the other half were not. According to our results, MTV editing style inhibits eyeblinks more than Hollywood style and one-shot style. More interestingly, we obtained differences in visual perception related to media professionalization: we found that media professionals inhibit eyeblink rate substantially compared with non-media professionals, in any style of audio-visual edition.

Fake images of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in the communication of information at the beginning of the first Covid-19 pandemic

This article explores whether there are differences in visual perception of narrative between theatrical performances and screens, and whether media professionalization affects visual perception. We created a live theatrical stimulus and three audio-visual stimuli (each one with a different video editing style) having the same narrative, and displayed them randomly to participants (20 media professionals and 20 non-media professionals). For media professionals, watching movies on screens evoked a significantly lower spontaneous blink rate (SBR) than looking at theatrical performances. Media professionals presented a substantially lower SBR than non-media professionals when watching screens, and more surprisingly, also when seeing reality. According to our results, media professionals pay higher attention to both screens and the real world than do non-media professionals.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved rapidly, sparking debates about its impact on the visual and sonic arts. Despite its growing integration into creative industries, public opinion remains sceptical, viewing creativity as uniquely human. In music production, AI tools are advancing, yet emotional expression remains largely overlooked in development and research. This study examined whether AI-powered music creation can evoke the same emotional impact as human-created music in audiovisual contexts. Participants (N = 88) watched videos accompanied by different audio tracks across three conditions: human-created music (HCM), AI-generated music using more sophisticated and detailed keyword prompts (AI-KP) and AI-generated music using simpler and less detailed prompts based on discrete and dimensional emotional values (AI-DP). Biometric data and personal affective responses were registered during this process. The results show that both AI soundtracks led to wider pupil dilation compared with human-created music but did not differ significantly from each other. AI-generated music with sophisticated prompts (AI-KP) resulted in a higher blink rate and skin impedance level as markers of attention and cognitive load, while emotional valence remained consistent across conditions. Participants found AI-generated music more arousing that HCM, while HCM was perceived as more familiar than both AI conditions.