Is this real? Susceptibility to deepfakes in machines and humans
Source record
pehlivanoglu-2026-machines-humans· 2026 · Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
Evidence tier: B (peer-reviewed-journal) · Verification: verified-fulltext
Bottom line: On StyleGAN2 faces humans were at chance (49%, AUC 0.53) with a strong truth bias while a CNN scored 97%; on videos the pattern reversed: machines near chance, humans better.
Citation
Didem Pehlivanoglu, Mengdi Zhu, Jialong Zhen, Aude A. Gagnon-Roberge, Rebecca K. Kern, Damon Woodard, Brian S. Cahill, Natalie C. Ebner (2026). Is this real? Susceptibility to deepfakes in machines and humans. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 11, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-025-00700-y
Verification entry (identifiers, resolvers, claims with source locations): /data/citations.json#pehlivanoglu-2026-machines-humans
Study design
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Design | Study 1: humans rated 200 faces 1 (fake) to 10 (real) plus individual-difference measures; compared with ResNet-50 CNN and frequency-domain SVM. Study 2: same comparison for deepfake videos |
| Modality | image-face, video |
| Stimuli | Study 1: 300 FFHQ real faces and 300 artefact-screened StyleGAN2 faces (sets of 200 per participant). Study 2: deepfake videos (details not read) |
| Participants (N) | 2203 |
| N detail | Study 1 N=2,203 undergraduates (age 18-58, M 19.64); Study 2 N not read |
| Topics | human-detection, human-vs-machine, truth-bias, confidence, individual-differences |
Results
| Metric | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Study 1 human accuracy (faces) | 49%; mean AUC 0.53 | N=2,203 |
| Study 1 deepfakes judged real | 69% | real judged real 67%: truth bias |
| Study 1 confidence | real 6.77 vs deepfake 4.11 (1-10 realness scale) | |
| Study 1 machine accuracy | CNN 97%; frequency-domain SVM 79% | |
| Study 2 (videos) | machines near chance; humans outperformed machines | abstract only; values not read |
Moderators
- Study 1: no individual-difference measure predicted face discrimination
- Study 2 (abstract): higher analytical thinking, lower positive affect and greater internet skills predicted better video detection
Limitations
- Undergraduate sample, 75% female
- Single GAN for faces
- Online, uncontrolled viewing
- Study 2 values not checked for this record
Cited in
- MR-0001: Human Detection of Deepfakes: Accuracy, Bias, Confidence, and Training
Verification
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Status | verified-fulltext |
| Compiler confidence | medium |
| Checked on | 2026-10-12 |
| Via | link.springer.com full text (Study 1 methods and results); Study 2 from abstract only |