The Magnitude of Truth: On Using Magnitude Estimation for Truthfulness Assessment
Michael Soprano, Denis Eduard Tapu, David La Barbera, Kevin Roitero, Stefano Mizzaro
Abstract
Assessing the truthfulness of information is a critical task in fact-checking, and is typically performed using binary or coarse ordinal scales (2-6 levels), though fine-grained scales (e.g., 100 levels) have also been explored. Magnitude Estimation (ME) takes this approach further by allowing assessors to assign any value in the range (0, + ∞). However, it introduces challenges, including the need for aggregation of assessments from individuals with different interpretations of the scale. Despite these, its successful applications in other domains suggest its potential suitability for truthfulness assessment. We conduct a crowdsourcing study by collecting assessments on claims sourced from the PolitiFact fact-checking organization using ME. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic investigation of ME in the context of truthfulness assessment. Our results show that while aggregation methods significantly impact assessment quality, optimal aggregation strategies yield accuracy and reliability comparable to traditional scales. More importantly, ME allows capturing subtle differences in truthfulness, offering richer insights than conventional coarse-grained scales.
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 f70d2a8d-1b93-4fe2-bc62-656acb7a705eBuilds on3
- 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
- An Effectiveness Metric for Ordinal Classification: Formal Properties and Experimental ResultsEnrique Amigó, Julio Gonzalo, Stefano Mizzaro, Jorge Carrillo-de-AlbornozACL 2020 · 39 citations
- Can The Crowd Identify Misinformation Objectively?: The Effects of Judgment Scale and Assessor's BackgroundKevin Roitero, Michael Soprano, Shaoyang Fan, Damiano Spina et al.SIGIR 2020 · 2 citations
Related papers
- Efficiency and Effectiveness of LLM-Based Summarization of Evidence in Crowdsourced Fact-CheckingKevin Roitero, Dustin Wright, Michael Soprano, Isabelle Augenstein et al.SIGIR 2025 · 5 citations
- Crowdsourcing System for Numerical Tasks based on Latent Topic Aware Worker ReliabilityZhuan Shi, Shanyang Jiang, Lan Zhang, Yang Du et al.INFOCOM 2021 · 15 citations
- Frustratingly Easy Truth DiscoveryReshef Meir, Ofra Amir, Omer Ben-Porat, Tsviel Ben Shabat et al.AAAI 2023 · 2 citations
- Efficient Online Crowdsourcing with Complex AnnotationsReshef Meir, Viet-An Nguyen, Xu Chen, Jagdish Ramakrishnan et al.AAAI 2024 · 1 citation
- Playing Planning Poker in Crowds: Human Computation of Software Effort EstimatesMohammed Alhamed, Tim StorerICSE 2021 · 18 citations
