東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ab...

Shriver, Emily A.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ability to Distinguish the Level of Post-Processing in Journalistic Images.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ability to Distinguish the Level of Post-Processing in Journalistic Images./
Author:	Shriver, Emily A.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2020,
Description:	112 p.
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 81-12.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International81-12.
Subject:	Quantitative psychology. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=27959860
ISBN:	9798641249032

An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ability to Distinguish the Level of Post-Processing in Journalistic Images.
Shriver, Emily A.

An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ability to Distinguish the Level of Post-Processing in Journalistic Images. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2020 - 112 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 81-12.

Thesis (M.S.)--Rochester Institute of Technology, 2020.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Photojournalists are held to a high degree of ethics because of the importance and impact of their work. To address this, several professional photojournalist organizations and publishers have created guidelines on how to appropriately post-process an image. Today the average media consumer is exposed to a diverse news landscape, and there is a tendency for consumers to trust photojournalistic images as being representative of the truth (Farid, 2006). This research considers to what extent can the average media consumer distinguish between ethically and unethically post-processed images. This study aimed to discover how well people can distinguish between three categories of images when viewing them quickly on their mobile devices. Using a web-based survey, participants were asked to identify various images as either original, enhanced, or manipulated. Original images had post-processing limited to cropping and having the aspect ratio changed. Enhanced images had aesthetic changes and did not attempt or intend to change the content or meaning of the image. Manipulated images either had material added, removed, or significantly changed. Furthermore, the image dataset was annotated to describe broad content characteristics such as people vs. no people and inside vs. outside. A Friedman test with a pairwise comparison with a Bonferroni correction was utilized to determine if there were differences in the percentage correct by semantic categories (People/No People, Indoors/Outdoors) and manipulation sub-categories (Add, Remove, Change).Recruited through social media and word of mouth, 1,919 participants responded to an average of 101 images out of a total of a possible 164, with an average of 1,180 responses per image. Participants were encouraged to provide their first impression. Responses were more likely to label the images as original (53.9%) compared to identifying them as enhanced (30.1%) or manipulated (16.0%). On average, only 36% of the images were correctly identified. Overall, participants' responses indicated that unless the manipulation was overly apparent or semantically absurd, they believed that the image must be either the original or enhanced.

ISBN: 9798641249032Subjects--Topical Terms:

2144748
Quantitative psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Fake news

An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ability to Distinguish the Level of Post-Processing in Journalistic Images.
LDR:03400nmm a2200385 4500 001 2271343
005 20201007134703.5
008 220629s2020 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798641249032
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI27959860
035 $a AAI27959860
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Shriver, Emily A. $3 3548757
245 1 3 $a An Assessment of Media Consumers' Ability to Distinguish the Level of Post-Processing in Journalistic Images.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2020
300 $a 112 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 81-12.
500 $a Advisor: Heusner, Christine.
502 $a Thesis (M.S.)--Rochester Institute of Technology, 2020.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Photojournalists are held to a high degree of ethics because of the importance and impact of their work. To address this, several professional photojournalist organizations and publishers have created guidelines on how to appropriately post-process an image. Today the average media consumer is exposed to a diverse news landscape, and there is a tendency for consumers to trust photojournalistic images as being representative of the truth (Farid, 2006). This research considers to what extent can the average media consumer distinguish between ethically and unethically post-processed images. This study aimed to discover how well people can distinguish between three categories of images when viewing them quickly on their mobile devices. Using a web-based survey, participants were asked to identify various images as either original, enhanced, or manipulated. Original images had post-processing limited to cropping and having the aspect ratio changed. Enhanced images had aesthetic changes and did not attempt or intend to change the content or meaning of the image. Manipulated images either had material added, removed, or significantly changed. Furthermore, the image dataset was annotated to describe broad content characteristics such as people vs. no people and inside vs. outside. A Friedman test with a pairwise comparison with a Bonferroni correction was utilized to determine if there were differences in the percentage correct by semantic categories (People/No People, Indoors/Outdoors) and manipulation sub-categories (Add, Remove, Change).Recruited through social media and word of mouth, 1,919 participants responded to an average of 101 images out of a total of a possible 164, with an average of 1,180 responses per image. Participants were encouraged to provide their first impression. Responses were more likely to label the images as original (53.9%) compared to identifying them as enhanced (30.1%) or manipulated (16.0%). On average, only 36% of the images were correctly identified. Overall, participants' responses indicated that unless the manipulation was overly apparent or semantically absurd, they believed that the image must be either the original or enhanced.
590 $a School code: 0465.
650 4 $a Quantitative psychology. $3 2144748
650 4 $a Journalism. $3 576107
650 4 $a Multimedia communications. $3 590562
653 $a Fake news
653 $a Manipulated images
653 $a Media literacy
653 $a Photography
653 $a Photojournalism
653 $a Visual competency
690 $a 0632
690 $a 0391
690 $a 0558
710 2 $a Rochester Institute of Technology. $b Print Media. $3 1024771
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 81-12.
790 $a 0465
791 $a M.S.
792 $a 2020
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=27959860