PCoT: Persuasion-Augmented Chain of Thought for Detecting Fake News and Social Media Disinformation
Arkadiusz Modzelewski, Witold Sosnowski, Tiziano Labruna, Adam Wierzbicki, Giovanni Da San Martino
Abstract
Disinformation detection is a key aspect of media literacy. Psychological studies have shown that knowledge of persuasive fallacies helps individuals detect disinformation. Inspired by these findings, we experimented with large language models (LLMs) to test whether infusing persuasion knowledge enhances disinformation detection. As a result, we introduce the Persuasion-Augmented Chain of Thought (PCoT), a novel approach that leverages persuasion to improve disinformation detection in zero-shot classification. We extensively evaluate PCoT on online news and social media posts. Moreover, we publish two novel, up-to-date disinformation datasets: EUDisinfo and MultiDis. These datasets enable the evaluation of PCoT on content entirely unseen by the LLMs used in our experiments, as the content was published after the models'knowledge cutoffs. We show that, on average, PCoT outperforms competitive methods by 15% across five LLMs and five datasets. These findings highlight the value of persuasion in strengthening zero-shot disinformation detection.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext e622ea3b-9f5e-4592-9019-9883fa149fd6Cited by top-tier papers2
- Reasoning About the Unsaid: Misinformation Detection with Omission-Aware Graph InferenceZhengjia Wang, Danding Wang, Qiang Sheng, Jiaying Wu et al.AAAI 2026 · 2 citations
- Are Rationales Necessary and Sufficient? Tuning LLMs for Explainable Misinformation DetectionBing Wang, Rui Miao, Ximing Li, Chen Shen et al.KDD 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on9
- Large Language Models are Zero-Shot ReasonersTakeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 8,168 citations
- Can LLM-Generated Misinformation Be Detected?Canyu Chen, Kai ShuICLR 2024 · 270 citations
- Birds of a feather don't fact-check each other: Partisanship and the evaluation of news in Twitter's Birdwatch crowdsourced fact-checking programJennifer Allen, Cameron Martel, David G. RandCHI 2022 · 104 citations
- With Little Power Comes Great ResponsibilityDallas Card, Peter Henderson, Urvashi Khandelwal, Robin Jia et al.EMNLP 2020 · 76 citations
- Towards Reliable Misinformation Mitigation: Generalization, Uncertainty, and GPT-4Kellin Pelrine, Anne Imouza, Camille Thibault, Meilina Reksoprodjo et al.EMNLP 2023 · 27 citations
Related papers
- Are LLMs Good Zero-Shot Fallacy Classifiers?Fengjun Pan, Xiaobao Wu, Zongrui Li, Anh Tuan LuuEMNLP 2024 · 7 citations
- Truth or Sophistry? LoFa: A Benchmark for LLM Robustness Against Logical FallaciesXudong Shen, Li Yuan, Ye Chen, Xin Wu et al.ACL 2026
- Fighting Fire with Fire: The Dual Role of LLMs in Crafting and Detecting Elusive DisinformationJason Samuel Lucas, Adaku Uchendu, Michiharu Yamashita, Jooyoung Lee et al.EMNLP 2023 · 23 citations
- How Good (Or Bad) Are LLMs at Detecting Misleading Visualizations?Leo Yu-Ho Lo, Huamin QuIEEE VIS 2024 · 24 citations
- Hidden in Plain Sight: Evaluation of the Deception Detection Capabilities of LLMs in Multimodal SettingsMd Messal Monem Miah, Adrita Anika, Xi Shi, Ruihong HuangACL 2025
