AI vs humans: Who is better at separating truth-tellers from liars?

89115827-1702257460-1

Research has shown that we’re generally pretty bad at telling a truth from a lie.

Some believe that AI could help improve our odds, and do better than dodgy old fashioned techniques like polygraph tests. AI-based lie detection systems could one day be used to help us sift fact from fake news, evaluate claims, and potentially even spot fibs and exaggerations in job applications. The question is whether we will trust them. And if we should.

In a recent study, Alicia von Schenk and her colleagues developed a tool that was significantly better than people at spotting lies. Von Schenk, an economist at the University of Würzburg in Germany, and her team then ran some experiments to find out how people used it. In some ways, the tool was helpful—the people who made use of it were better at spotting lies. But they also led people to make a lot more accusations.

Mis- and disinformation are distorting science and public policy. Subscribe to our Daily and Weekly Digests for incisive coverage of ‘disruptive’ innovations in AI, agricultural biotechnology, food, chemicals, nuclear energy, vaccines, and other disruptive innovations.

If the price of accurate judgements is the deterioration of social bonds, is it worth it?

And then there’s the question of accuracy. In their study, von Schenk and her colleagues were only interested in creating a tool that was better than humans at lie detection. That isn’t too difficult, given how terrible we are at it. But she also imagines a tool like hers being used to routinely assess the truthfulness of social media posts, or hunt for fake details in a job hunter’s resume or interview responses. In cases like these, it’s not enough for a technology to just be “better than human” if it’s going to be making more accusations.

This is an excerpt. Read the full article here

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-10-08-at-10.41.33-AM
Viewpoint: Wellness patches: Most vitamin supplements are useless and sometimes even dangerous, but this craze is even worse
newborn baby spit up gerd
Vaccine-preventable congenital infections are a leading driver of autism
Screenshot-2026-10-14-at-11.45.36-AM
Viewpoint: RFK Jr.’s stacked FDA advisory council endorses multicancer screening test from ethically- questionable company that would increase false positives and waste billions of dollars
Misinformation-Shatters-the-Clockwork-Mind
Viewpoint: The price Americans pay for science denialism
Screenshot-2026-10-15-at-12.13.33-PM
Ahead of the midterms, Meta has paid at least 29 anti-LGBTQ accounts for their posts
Pride and Patriotism in the Breeze
Retreat from identity labels: Does the sharply declining number of young teens identifying as gay and bisexual reflect an ideological shift?
Screenshot-2026-10-14-at-12.47.21-PM
Viewpoint: Are these Trump-conservative GOP doctor-politicians violating their medical oath?
Crossed-Out-Calendar-with-Milk-Carton
Viewpoint: The shocking consequences after a year of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s distortions, deceptions, and flat-out falsehoods
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.