Towards Gaze-Informed AI Disclosure Interfaces: Eye-Tracking Attentional and Cognitive Load While Reading AI-Assisted News

As generative AI becomes increasingly integrated into journalism, designing effective AI-use disclosures that inform readers without imposing unnecessary burden is a key challenge. While prior research has primarily focused on trust and credibility, the impact of disclosures on readers' attentional and cognitive load remains underexplored. To address this gap, we conducted a $3\times2\times2$ mixed factorial study manipulating the level of AI-use disclosure detail (none, one-line, detailed), news type (politics, lifestyle), and role of AI (editing, partial content generation), measuring load via NASA-TLX and eye-tracking. Our results reveal a significant attentional cost: one-line disclosures resulted in significantly higher fixation durations and saccade counts, particularly for AI-edited content. Detailed disclosures did not impose additional burden. Drawing on Information-Gap Theory, we argue that brief labels may trigger increased visual scrutiny by alerting readers to AI use without providing enough information. NASA-TLX scores and pupil diameter showed no significant differences across conditions, suggesting that AI-use disclosures do not impose cognitive burden regardless of the detail level. Interview insights contextualize these findings and reveal a strong preference for detailed or ``detail-on-demand'' designs. Our findings inform the design of gaze-informed adaptive disclosure interfaces that dynamically adjust transparency levels based on readers' attentional patterns and news context.

Full Disclosure, Less Trust? How the Level of Detail about AI Use in News Writing Affects Readers' Trust

As artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into news production, calls for transparency about the use of AI have gained considerable traction. Recent studies suggest that AI disclosures can lead to a ``transparency dilemma'', where disclosure reduces readers' trust. However, little is known about how the \textit{level of detail} in AI disclosures influences trust and contributes to this dilemma within the news context. In this 3$\times$2$\times$2 mixed factorial study with 40 participants, we investigate how three levels of AI disclosures (none, one-line, detailed) across two types of news (politics and lifestyle) and two levels of AI involvement (low and high) affect news readers' trust. We measured trust using the News Media Trust questionnaire, along with two decision behaviors: source-checking and subscription decisions. Questionnaire responses and subscription rates showed a decline in trust only for detailed AI disclosures, whereas source-checking behavior increased for both one-line and detailed disclosures, with the effect being more pronounced for detailed disclosures. Insights from semi-structured interviews suggest that source-checking behavior was primarily driven by interest in the topic, followed by trust, whereas trust was the main factor influencing subscription decisions. Around two-thirds of participants expressed a preference for detailed disclosures, while most participants who preferred one-line indicated a need for detail-on-demand disclosure formats. Our findings show that not all AI disclosures lead to a transparency dilemma, but instead reflect a trade-off between readers' desire for more transparency and their trust in AI-assisted news content.