Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors Affecting the Reliability of Information: The Case of ChatGPT

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advanced Research in Technologies, Information, Innovation and Sustainability (ARTIIS 2023)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1937))

  • 164 Accesses

Abstract

The abundance of current information makes it necessary to select the highest quality documents. For this purpose, it is necessary to deepen the knowledge of information quality systems. The different dimensions of quality are analyzed, and different problems related to these dimensions are discussed. The paper groups these issues into different facets: primary information, its manipulation and interpretation, and the publication and dissemination of information. The impact of these interdependent facets on the production of untruthful information is discussed. Finally, ChatGPT is analyzed as a use case. It is shown how these problems and facets have an impact on the quality of the system and the mentions made by experts are analyzed. Different challenges that artificial intelligence systems face are concluded.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sequoiah-Grayson, S., Floridi, L.: Semantic conceptions of information. In: Zalta, E.N., (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2022 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2022/entries/information-semantic/

  2. CIHI: CIHI’s Information Quality Framework. Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). Ottawa, Canada (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Floridi, L.: The Philosophy of Information. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2011)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Díaz-Nafría, J.M., Salto-Alemany, F., Pérez-Montoro, M. (coord.): glossariumBITri: Interdisciplinary Elucidation of Concepts, Metaphors, Theories and Problems Concerning Information. UPSE-BITrum, Santa Elena, Ecuador (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Díaz-Nafría, J.M., Zimmermann, R.: Emergence and evolution of meaning. The GDI revisiting programme. Part 2: regressive perspective. Information 4(2), 240–261 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3390/info4020240

  6. Díaz-Nafría, J.M., Zimmermann, R.: Emergence and evolution of meaning. Triple C 11(1), 13–35 (2013). https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v11i1.334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zimmermann, R., Díaz-Nafría, J.M.: Emergence and evolution of meaning. The GDI revisiting programme. Part 1: progressive perspective. Informationb 3(3), 472–503 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3390/info3030472

  8. Redman, T.C.: Data quality: a view from the field. DM Rev. 11, 38–41 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pipino, L.L., Lee, Y.W., Wang, R.Y.: Data quality assessment. Commun. ACM 45, 211–218 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1145/505248.505271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Glanzberg, M.: Truth. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2021). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/truth/ (2021)

  11. Floridi, L.: Outline of a theory of truth as correctness for semantic information. tripleC 7(2), 142–157 (2009). https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v7i2.131

  12. Arazy, O., Kopak, R., Hadar, I.: Heuristic principles and differential judgments in the assessment of information quality. JAIS 18, 403–432 (2017). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00458

  13. Lee, Y.W., Strong, D.M., Kahn, B.K., Wang, R.Y.: AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Inform. Manage. 40, 133–146 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00043-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang, R.Y., Strong, D.M.: Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 12, 5–33 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Strong, D.M., Lee, Y.W., Wang, R.Y.: Data quality in context. Commun. ACM 40, 103–110 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1145/253769.253804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang, R.Y., Strong, D.M., Liew, C.-W.: Information quality research: its past, present and future. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 213–222. IEEE (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pérez, A., et al.: Fostering teenagers’ assessment of information reliability: effects of a classroom intervention focused on critical source dimensions. Learn. Instr. 58, 53–64 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tabibian, B., Valera, I., Farajtabar, M., Song, L., Schölkopf, B., Gomez-Rodriguez, M.: Distilling information reliability and source trustworthiness from digital traces. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web. pp. 847–855. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Perth Australia (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Diaz Ruiz, C., Nilsson, T.: Disinformation and echo chambers: how disinformation circulates on social media through identity-driven controversies. J. Public Policy Mark. 42, 18–35 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156221103852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dwivedi, Y.K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E.L., et al.: Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. Int. J. Inform. Manage. 71, 102642 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

  21. Phuong, J., et al.: Information needs and priority use cases of population health researchers to improve preparedness for future hurricanes and floods. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 28, 249–260 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Stvilia, B., Gasser, L., Twidale, M.B., Smith, L.C.: A framework for information quality assessment. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 58, 1720–1733 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Taleb, I., Serhani, M.A., Bouhaddioui, C., Dssouli, R.: Big data quality framework: a holistic approach to continuous quality management. J. Big Data. 8, 76 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40537-021-00468-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Shah, A.A., Ravana, S.D., Hamid, S., Maizatul Akmar, I.: Web credibility assessment: affecting factors and assessment techniques, Inform. Res. 20(1), 655 (2015) http://informationr.net/ir/20-1/paper663.html#.YJp4YLX7SUk

  25. Hern, A.: Covid: how Excel may have caused loss of 16,000 test results in England | Health policy | The Guardian (2020). https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/05/how-excel-may-have-caused-loss-of-16000-covid-tests-in-england

  26. Foley, O., Helfert, M.: Information quality and accessibility. In: Sobh, T. (ed.) Innovations and Advances in Computer Sciences and Engineering, pp. 477–481. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Morato, J., Iglesias, A., Campillo, A., Sanchez-Cuadrado, S.: Automated readability assessment for spanish e-government information. J Inform Systems Eng. 6, em0137 (2021). https://doi.org/10.29333/jisem/9620

  28. Crawford-Manning, F., et al.: Evaluation of quality and readability of online patient information on osteoporosis and osteoporosis drug treatment and recommendations for improvement. Osteoporos Int. 32, 1567–1584 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05800-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. El Arass, M., Souissi, N.: Data lifecycle: from big data to SmartData. In: 2018 IEEE 5th International Congress on Information Science and Technology (CiSt), pp. 80–87. IEEE, Marrakech (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Molinari, A., Nollo, G.: The quality concerns in health care Big Data. In: 2020 IEEE 20th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference (MELECON), pp. 302–305. IEEE, Palermo, Italy (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ghasemaghaei, M.: Understanding the impact of big data on firm performance: the necessity of conceptually differentiating among big data characteristics. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 57, 102055 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.102055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pendyala, V.: Veracity of web information. In: Veracity of Big Data, pp. 17–33. Apress, Berkeley, CA (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Koltun, V., Hafner, D.: The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation. PLoS ONE 16, e0253397 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lazer, D., Kennedy, R., King, G., Vespignani, A.: The parable of google flu: traps in big data analysis. Science 343, 1203–1205 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1248506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., Aral, S.: The spread of true and false news online. Science 359, 1146–1151 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hardford, T.: Big data: a big mistake? Significance, pp. 14–19 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-9713.2014.00778.x

  37. Ruas, T., Grosky, W., Aizawa, A.: Multi-sense embeddings through a word sense disambiguation process. Expert Syst. Appl. 136, 288–303 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Vaswani, A., et al.: Attention is all you need. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. pp. 6000–6010. Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Vicent, J.: Google’s AI chatbot Bard makes factual error in first demo. The Verge, Feb, 8 (2023). https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/8/23590864/google-ai-chatbot-bard-mistake-error-exoplanet-demo

  40. Ayers, J.W., et al.: Evaluating artificial intelligence responses to public health questions. JAMA Netw. Open 6, e2317517 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.17517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Christensen, C.: A decade of WikiLeaks: So what? Int. J. Media Cultural Politics 10(3), 273–284 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1386/macp.10.3.273_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ramonet, I.: La tyrannie de la communication. Gallimard, Paris (2001)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Av. Universidad 30, 28911, Leganes, Spain

    Jorge Morato

  2. Universidad a Distancia de Madrid, Pº General Martinez Campos 5, 28010, Madrid, Spain

    Jose María Diaz-Nafria

  3. Universidad Complutense, C/ Santisima Trinidad, 37, 28010, Madrid, Spain

    Sonia Sanchez-Cuadrado

Authors
  1. Jorge Morato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jose María Diaz-Nafria
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sonia Sanchez-Cuadrado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jose María Diaz-Nafria .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Estatal Peninsula de Santa Elena Campus Matriz, La Libertad, Ecuador

    Teresa Guarda

  2. Algoritmi Research Centre, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal

    Filipe Portela

  3. Universidad a Distancia de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Jose Maria Diaz-Nafria

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Morato, J., Diaz-Nafria, J.M., Sanchez-Cuadrado, S. (2024). Factors Affecting the Reliability of Information: The Case of ChatGPT. In: Guarda, T., Portela, F., Diaz-Nafria, J.M. (eds) Advanced Research in Technologies, Information, Innovation and Sustainability. ARTIIS 2023. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1937. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48930-3_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48930-3_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-48929-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-48930-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation