RESEARCH PAPERS

Research on the Process and Influencing Factors of User Information Verification Behavior in the AIGC Context

  • Lin Shan ,
  • Deng Xiaozhao
Expand
  • 1 Business College of Southwest University, Chongqing 402460;
    2 College of Computer and Information Science, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715
Lin Shan, Master’s Candidate; Deng Xiaozhao, Professor, PhD, Doctoral Supervisor, Corresponding Author, E-mail: dxz@swu.edu.cn.

Received date: 2024-12-03

  Revised date: 2025-02-18

  Online published: 2025-11-19

Abstract

[Purpose/Significance] This study systematically explores the process and influencing factors of user information verification behavior in the AIGC context. It addresses the existing gap in understanding how users verify information in the AIGC context, while providing practical insights for improving individual information validation motivation and optimizing AIGC platform performance. [Method/Process] Eighteen active AIGC platform users were selected for semi-structured interviews. The interview data were analyzed using grounded theory coding to construct a model representing the process and influencing factors of user information verification behavior in the AIGC context. [Result/Conclusion] The study finds that cognitive, emotional, and task-related motivations drive users’ information verification behavior. Users employ two strategies, independent corroboration and technical verification, to assess the authenticity and accuracy of AIGC. Based on the verification results, users decide whether to implement the validation strategy feedback adjustments, information adoption, information abandonment, information corrections, or transfer of behaviors. Moreover, factors such as users’ AI literacy, user cognitive psychology, information quality, task context, facilitative conditions, and technological features all significantly influence their information verification behavior.

Cite this article

Lin Shan , Deng Xiaozhao . Research on the Process and Influencing Factors of User Information Verification Behavior in the AIGC Context[J]. Library and Information Service, 2025 , 69(22) : 136 -148 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2025.22.011

References

[1] 李颖婷. 生成式人工智能给图书馆带来的机遇、挑战及应对策略[J]. 图书与情报, 2023(2): 42-48. (LI Y T. Opportunities, challenges, and strategies for libraries in the era of artificial intelligence generated content[J]. Library & information, 2023(2): 42-48.)
[2] 中国互联网络信息中心. 生成式人工智能应用发展报告(2024)[EB/OL]. [2025-05-07]. https://www.cnnic.cn/n4/2024/1201/c208-11166.html. (China internet network information center. the development report on the applications of generative artificial intelligence(2024)[EB/OL]. [2025-05-07]. https://www.cnnic.cn/n4/2024/1201/c208-11166.html.)
[3] STOKEL-WALKER C, NOORDEN V R. What ChatGPT and generative ai mean for science[J]. Nature, 2023, 614(7947): 214-216.
[4] SHIN D, KOERBER A, LIM J S. Impact of misinformation from generative ai on user information processing: how people understand misinformation from generative ai[J/OL]. New media & society, 1-31[2025-05-07]. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/14614448241234040.
[5] FLANAGIN A J, METZGER M J. Perceptions of internet information credibility[J]. journalism & mass communication quarterly, 2000, 77(3): 515-540.
[6] 张薇薇. 网络用户信息查证行为探究[J]. 情报资料工作, 2013(5): 71-76. (ZHANG W W. A probe into the network user information verification behavior[J]. Information and documentation services, 2013(5): 71-76.)
[7] METZGER M J, FLANAGIN A J, ZWARUN L. College student web use, perceptions of information[J]. Computers & education, 2003, 41(3): 271-290.
[8] 黄崑, 王潇雨, 胡文瑾, 等. 大学生信息求证行为模型构建研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2023, 67(11): 101-114. (HUANG K, WANG X Y, HU W J, et al. Construction of college students’ information verification behavior model[J]. Library and information service, 2023, 67(11): 101-114.)
[9] TORRES R, GERHART N, NEGAHBAN A. Epistemology in the era of fake news: an exploration of information verification behaviors among social networking site users[J]. SIGMIS database, 2018, 49(3): 78-97.
[10] SUN Y. Verification upon exposure to covid-19 misinformation: predictors, outcomes, and the mediating role of verification[J]. Science communication, 2022, 44(3): 261-291.
[11] 郭亚军, 刘振阳, 郭一若, 等. AIGC大学生用户信息需求研究——以ChatGPT为例[J]. 情报科学, 2024, 42(8): 34-44. (GUO Y J, LIU Z Y, GUO Y R, et al. Study on the information needs of college students using AIGC——taking ChatGPT as an example[J]. Information science, 2024, 42(8): 34-44.)
[12] 常琳, 叶凤云. 生成式人工智能用户虚假信息规避行为研究[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2025, 48(2): 102-112. (CHANG L, YE F Y. Research on false information avoidance behavior of generative artificial intelligence users[J]. Information studies: theory & application, 2025, 48(2): 102-112.)
[13] 郭顺利, 张雪宁, 苏新宁. 科研场景下人工智能生成内容用户采纳意愿的影响因素组态效应分析[J]. 现代情报, 2025, 45(4): 74-86. (GUO S L, ZHANG X N, SU X N. Configuration effect analysis of factors influencing user adoption intention of artificial intelligence generated content in scientific research scenario[J]. Journal of modern information, 2025, 45(4): 74-86.)
[14] YANG X D, SONG B, CHEN L, et al. Technological optimism surpasses fear of missing out: a multigroup analysis of presumed media influence on generative ai technology adoption across varying levels of technological optimism[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2025, 162: 108466.
[15] 邱均平, 龙康, 徐中阳. 基于ECT-U&G的生成式AI用户持续使用意愿的实证研究——以大学生为例[J/OL]. 现代情报: 1-19[2025-05-07]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/22.1182.G3.20241113.1121.006. (QIU J P, LONG K, XU Z Y. empirical research of generative ai users’ continuance use intention based on ECT-U&G: in case of college students. Journal of modern information: 1-19[2025-05-07]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/22.1182.G3.20241113.1121.006.)
[16] 赵静, 倪明扬, 张倩, 等. AIGC重构研究生学术实践: 持续使用意愿影响因素研究[J]. 现代情报, 2024, 44(7): 34-46. (ZHAO J, NI M Y, ZHANG Q, et al. AIGC reconfiguring graduate student academic practice: a study on factors influencing continuous usage intention[J]. Journal of modern information, 2024, 44(7): 34-46.)
[17] 张玥, 李青宇, 刘雨琪, 等. 组态视角下AIGC应用平台用户中辍行为影响因素研究[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2024, 47(3): 130-137, 148. (ZHANG Y, LI Q Y, LIU Y Q, et al. A study on discontinuance behavior in the AIGC application platform based on the perspective of configuration[J]. Information studies: theory & application, 2024, 47(3): 130-137, 148.)
[18] 周涛, 张春雷, 邓胜利. 基于C-A-C的生成式AI用户间歇性中辍行为研究[J]. 现代情报, 2025, 45(3): 40-50, 64. (ZHOU T, ZHANG C L, DENG S L. Examining generative ai users’ intermittent discontinuance based on the C-A-C[J]. Journal of modern information, 2025, 45(3): 40-50, 64.)
[19] 邱均平, 宓秦泽, 徐中阳, 等. 高校学术用户信息搜寻转移行为影响因素[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2024, 44(10): 121-130. (QIU J P, MI Q Z, XU Z Y, et al. Factors influencing the information seeking transfer behavior of academic users in colleges and universities[J]. Library tribune, 2024, 44(10): 121-130.)
[20] 周涛, 吴晓颖, 邓胜利. 用户知识问答转移行为研究: 从问答社区到生成式AI[J]. 情报杂志, 2024, 43(2): 200-207. (ZHOU T, WU X Y, DENG S L. Examining users’ switching behavior of knowledge Q&A: from Q&A communities to generative ai[J]. Journal of information, 2024, 43(2): 200-207.)
[21] 王俊, 谢青伶, 刘畅. 日常生活情境下用户与生成式人工智能交互行为分析[J/OL]. 图书情报知识, 1-11[2025-05-07]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/42.1085.G2.20240825.1737.004. (WANG J, XIE Q L, LIU C. User’s interaction behavior with generative artificial intelligence in daily life contexts[J]. Documentation, information & knowledge, 2024: 1-11.[2025-05-07]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/42.1085.G2.20240825.1737.004.)
[22] 卢新元, 张进澳, 雷晓鹏. 人工智能生成内容环境下用户信息行为研究——以对话式搜索引擎为例[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2023, 46(12): 84-92. (LU X Y, ZHANG J A, LEI X P. Research on user’s information behavior in artificial intelligence generated content environment: take a conversational search engine as an example[J]. Information studies: theory & application, 2023, 46(12): 84-92.)
[23] LIANG L F, YANG B, SUN Y Q. Understanding nonlinear relationship between user verification behavior and perceived credibility in ChatGPT: a moderating role of social cues[C]//DANG D, LIU Y, WANG M: PACIS 2024 Proceedings. Ho Chi Minh City: Association for Information Systems, 2024: 1-16.
[24] FLANAGIN A J, METZGER M J. The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information[J]. New media & society, 2007, 9(2): 319-342.
[25] 张薇薇, 柏露. 开放内容情境下用户信息查证行为的动因机理研究[J]. 情报资料工作, 2015(5): 58-63. (ZHANG W W, BAI L. Motivation mechanism analysis of users information verification behavior in the open content context[J]. Information and documentation services, 2015(5): 58-63.)
[26] KHAN M L, IDRIS I K. Recognize misinformation and verify before sharing: a reasoned action and information literacy perspective[J]. Behavior & information technology, 2019, 38(12): 1194-1212.
[27] LIM S, SIMON C. Credibility judgment and verification behavior of college students concerning wikipedia[J]. First monday, 2011, 16(4): 1-19.
[28] JIANG S H. The roles of worry, social media information overload, and social media fatigue in hindering health fact-checking[J]. Social media & society, 2022, 8(3): 20563051221113070.
[29] EDGERLY S, MOURÃO R R, THORSON E, et al. When do audiences verify? how perceptions about message and source influence audience verification of news headlines[J]. Journalism & mass communication quarterly, 2020, 97(1): 52-71.
[30] CHANG C C. Fake news: audience perceptions and concerted coping strategies[J]. Digital journalism, 2021, 9(5): 636-659.
[31] XIAO X Z. Let’s verify and rectify! examining the nuanced influence of risk appraisal and norms in combatting misinformation[J]. New media & society, 2024, 26(7): 3786-3809.
[32] MELKI J, TAMIN H, HADID D, et al. Mitigating infodemics: the relationship between news exposure and trust and belief in covid-19 fake news and social media spreading[J]. Plos one, 2021, 16(6): e0252830.
[33] 林羿妏, 陈昭秀. 大专院校生的批判思考意向与Facebook特性对其信息验证行为的影响[J]. 台湾科技大学人文社会学报, 2012, 8(1): 17-36. (LIN Y W, CHEN Z X. The impact of college students’ critical thinking intentions and Facebook characteristics on their information verification behavior[J]. Taiwan University of Science and Technology journal of liberal arts and social sciences, 2012, 8(1): 17-36.)
[34] BARAKAT K A, DABBOUS A, TARHINI A. An empirical approach to understanding users’ fake news identification on social media[J]. Online information review, 2021, 45(6): 1080-1096.
[35] 莫祖英, 刘欢, 盘大清. 社交媒体用户虚假信息验证行为影响模型实证研究[J]. 信息资源管理学报, 2023, 13(4): 72-83. (MO Z Y, LIU H, PAN D Q. An empirical study on the influence model of social media users’ disinformation verification behavior[J]. Journal of information resources management, 2023, 13(4): 72-83.)
[36] HOCEVAR K P, FLANAGIN A J, METZGER M J. Social media self-efficacy and information evaluation online[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2014, 39: 254-262.
[37] JAHNG M R, STOYCHEFF E, ROCHADIAT A. They said it’s “fake“: effects of discounting cues in online comments on information quality judgments and information authentication[J]. Mass communication and society, 2021, 24(4): 527-552.
[38] 贾旭东, 衡量. 扎根理论的“丛林”、过往与进路[J]. 科研管理, 2020, 41(5): 151-163. (JIA X D, HENG L. The “jungle”, history, and approach road of the grounded theory[J]. Science research management, 2020, 41(5): 151-163.)
[39] HECKHAUSEN J, HECKHAUSEN H. Motivation and action[M]. Cham: Springer, 2018.
[40] 刘子旻, 时勘, 万金, 等. 认知闭合需要研究梳理与未来走向[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(4): 688-697. (LIU Z M, SHI K, WAN J, et al. Analysis and outlook of need for cognitive closure research[J]. Advances in psychological science, 2018, 26(4): 688-697.)
[41] LEON F. A theory of cognitive dissonance[M]. California: Stanford University Press, 1968.
[42] IZARD C E. The psychology of emotions[M]. New York: Plenum Press, 1991.
[43] PLUTCHIK R. Emotion, a psychoevolutionary synthesis[M]. New York: The American Journal of Psychology, 1980.
[44] 郭亚军, 寇旭颍, 冯思倩, 等. 人工智能素养: 内涵剖析与评估标准构建[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2025, 45(2): 42-50. (GUO Y J, KOU X Y, FENG S Q, et al. Artificial intelligence literacy: connotation analysis and evaluation criteria[J]. Library tribune, 2025, 45(2): 42-50.)
[45] A JZEN I. The theory of planned behavior[J]. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 1991, 50: 179-211.
[46] 李武, 李昕, 毛远逸. 亲社会行为动机视角下公益众筹信息分享行为研究[J]. 新闻与传播评论, 2021, 74(2): 49-61. (LI W, LI X, MAO Y Y. Share or not: understanding users’ sharing of charitable crowd funding information from the perspective of prosocial behavior motivation[J]. Journalism & communication review, 2021, 74(2): 49-61.)
[47] 中国大百科全书第三版网络版. 心理定势[EB/OL]. [2025-05-07]. https://www.zgbk.com/ecph/words?SiteID=1&ID=26672&Type=bkzyb&SubID=42599. (Encyclopedia of China librarians literacy. Mental set[EB/OL]. [2025-05-07]. https://www.zgbk.com/ecph/words?SiteID=1&ID=26672&Type=bkzyb&SubID=42599.)
[48] MAJERCZAK P, STRZELECKI A. Trust, media credibility, social ties, and the intention to share towards information verification in an age of fake news[J]. Behavioral sciences, 2022, 12(2): 51-67.
[49] PUNDIR V, DEVI E B, NATH V. Arresting fake news sharing on social media: a theory of planned behavior approach[J]. Management research review, 2021, 44(8): 1108-1138.
[50] LEE J, HAMELEERS M, SHIN S Y. The emotional effects of multimodal disinformation: how multimodality, issue relevance, and anxiety affect misperceptions about the flu vaccine[J]. New media & society, 2023, 26(12): 6838-6860.
[51] METZGER M J. Making sense of credibility on the web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007, 58(13): 2078-2091.
[52] JUN Y, MENG R, JOHAR G V. Perceived social presence reduces fact-checking[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2017, 114(23): 5976-5981.
[53] GEENG C, YEE S, ROESNER F. Fake news on facebook and twitter: investigating how people (don’t) investigate[C]//Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020: 1-14.
Outlines

/

〈 〉