The Role of AI-Generated Content Transparency in Shaping Public Trust and Information Acceptance on Social Media Platforms

The increasing prevalence of AI-generated content on social media platforms has raised concerns regarding information credibility, authenticity, and users’ ability to evaluate digital information. As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into online communication, transparency regarding AI involvement in content creation has emerged as an important mechanism for reducing uncertainty and promoting trust. This study aims to examine the role of AI-generated content transparency in shaping public trust and information acceptance on social media platforms. A quantitative research approach was employed using a survey method. Data were collected from 250 active social media users who had prior experience interacting with AI-generated content. The proposed research model was analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to examine the direct and indirect relationships among AI-generated content transparency, public trust, and information acceptance. The results indicate that AI-generated content transparency has a significant positive effect on public trust and information acceptance. Public trust also exerts a significant positive influence on information acceptance. Furthermore, public trust partially mediates the relationship between AI-generated content transparency and information acceptance, indicating that transparency enhances information acceptance both directly and indirectly through increased trust. The findings highlight the importance of transparent disclosure mechanisms in AI-mediated communication environments. By strengthening public trust and facilitating information acceptance, transparency can contribute to the development of a more accountable, credible, and trustworthy digital information ecosystem. The study further contributes to the literature by integrating transparency, trust, and information acceptance into a unified framework for understanding user responses to AI-generated content on social media platforms.

AI-generated content transparency; public trust; information acceptance; social media.

1. Aleknevičienė, V., & Gudaitienė, R. (2026). Evolution of the research of cryptocurrency, social media, and its influence on the crypto market: A bibliometric and content analysis. International Review of Economics & Finance, 109, 105410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2026.105410 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Balaban, D. C., & Phua, J. (2026). Is this real or fake? Examining the effects of disclosure of AI-generated content and source type in Instagram-based travel destination advertising on consumer attitudes and behavioral intentions. Computers in Human Behavior, 183, 109047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2026.109047 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Boatwright, B. C., DiRusso, C., & Pyle, A. (2026). Somebody's poisoned the water hole! Advancing social media data collection principles to account for the effects of AI slop on public relations scholarship. Public Relations Review, 52(3), 102716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2026.102716 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Brüns, J. D., & Meißner, M. (2024). Do you create your content yourself? Using generative artificial intelligence for social media content creation diminishes perceived brand authenticity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 79, 103790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103790 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chhabra, J., Pilkington, V., Benakovic, R., Wilson, M. J., La Sala, L., & Seidler, Z. (2025). Social media and youth mental health: Scoping review of platform and policy recommendations. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 27. https://doi.org/10.2196/72061 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Conrad, C., Nissen, A., Masoumi, K., Ramchandani, M., Braga, R. F., & Newman, A. J. (2025). Do truthfulness notifications influence perceptions of AI-generated political images? A cognitive investigation with EEG. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 5, 100185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100185 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Duong, H. L., & Vo, T. K. O. (2025). How do young users perceive and respond to AI-generated short-form videos? An exploration of Generation Z's perceptions, emotional responses, and trust in AI-created video on social media platforms. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 206, 103660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103660 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M., Dennehy, D., Metri, B., Buhalis, D., Cheung, C. M. K., Conboy, K., Doyle, R., Dubey, R., Dutot, V., Felix, R., Goyal, D. P., Gustafsson, A., Hinsch, C., Jebabli, I., … Wamba, S. F. (2023). So what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges, and implications of generative conversational AI. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 51–90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627–660. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hair, J. F., Howard, M. C., & Nitzl, C. (2020). Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Joel-Edgar, S., Chowdhury, S., Nagy, P., & Ren, S. (2025). Virtual influencers in social media versus the metaverse: Mind perception, blame judgements and brand trust. Journal of Business Research, 189, 115139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115139 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Jung, T., Koghut, M., Lee, E., & Kwon, O. (2025). Artificial creativity in luxury advertising: How trust and perceived humanness drive consumer response to AI-generated content. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 87, 104403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104403 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Khalfallah, D., & Keller, V. (2025). Authenticity, ethics, and transparency in virtual influencer marketing: A cross-cultural analysis of consumer trust and engagement. Acta Psychologica, 260, 105573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105573 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54(3), 241–251. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Li, F., & Yang, Y. (2024). Impact of artificial intelligence-generated content labels on perceived accuracy, message credibility, and sharing intentions for misinformation: Web-based randomized controlled experiment. JMIR Formative Research, 8. https://doi.org/10.2196/60024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Li, J., Qu, L., Cai, T., Zhao, Z., Al Hasan Haldar, N., Krishna, A., Kong, X., Romero Macau, F., Chakraborty, T., Deroy, A., Lin, B., Blackmore, K., Noman, N., Cheng, J., Cui, N., & Xu, J. (2025). AI-generated content in cross-domain applications: Research trends, challenges and propositions. Knowledge-Based Systems, 330, 114634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2025.114634 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Liu, J., Sun, M., & Xu, T. (2026). Trust the machine or the human? A dynamic neuro-cognitive model of AIGC credibility assessment. Acta Psychologica, 268, 107222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107222 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Merl, N. B., Schramm, F., Wies, C., Winterstein, J. T., & Brinker, T. J. (2026). Generative AI in social media health communication: Systematic review and meta-analysis of user engagement with implications for cancer prevention. European Journal of Cancer, 232, 116114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2025.116114 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & McCann, R. M. (2003). Credibility for the 21st century: Integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility. Communication Research, 30(5), 529–563. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Miskolczi, M. (2026). The illusion of reality: How AI-generated images are fooling social media users. Computers in Human Behavior, 176, 108876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2025.108876 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Ngo, T. T. A., Nguyen, N. D. M., & Nguyen, N. A. (2026). Understanding the adoption of AI-generated deepfake content on social media: An extended Information Acceptance Model approach. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 22, 100327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2026.100327 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers' perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 39–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Rawlins, B. L. (2008). Measuring the relationship between organizational transparency and employee trust. Public Relations Journal, 2(2), 1–21. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Rynarzewska, A. I., Nafees, L., Johnson, K. C., LeMay, S., & Helms, M. M. (2026). The role of social media content creators in reputation repair: A netnographic study of Depp v. Heard. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 35(3), 429–447. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-07-2024-5325 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Becker, J.-M., & Ringle, C. M. (2022). How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM. Australasian Marketing Journal, 30(3), 197–211. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Schnackenberg, A. K., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2016). Organizational transparency: A new perspective on managing trust in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 633–689. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Shin, D. (2021). The effects of explainability and causability on perception, trust, and acceptance of artificial intelligence. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 146, 102551. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Shin, D. (2022). User perceptions of algorithmic decisions: The role of transparency, fairness, trust, and explainability. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(7), 1454–1470. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Srivastava, R. K., & Gurme, V. (2026). Artificial intelligence and consumer behaviour on social media: A study of personalization, trust, and privacy. Measurement: Digitalization, 5, 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meadig.2025.100021 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Sussman, S. W., & Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Information Systems Research, 14(1), 47–65. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Wei, M., Song, Z., Liu, J., & Liu, P. (2026). Risk perception and trust mechanisms in AIGC technologies: Evidence from a Bayesian SEM analysis. The Electronic Library, 44(3), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-05-2025-0181 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Wibowo, M. P. (2025). Generative AI for library social media content creation and communication. Library Hi Tech News, 42(8), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-06-2025-0109 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Wu, C., Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, H., & Pang, Y. (2025). Confront hate with AI: How AI-generated counter speech helps against hate speech on social media. Telematics and Informatics, 101, 102304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2025.102304 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Yang, X., Ding, J., Chen, H., & Ji, H. (2024). Factors affecting the use of artificial intelligence-generated content by subject librarians: A qualitative study. Heliyon, 10(8), e29584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29584 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Zhou, T., & Fang, X. (2026). Understanding user trust in AI-generated content: An elaboration likelihood model perspective. Online Information Review, 50(1), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-01-2025-0041 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Communication Strategies among Promoters During MATTA Fair 2025
• An Examination of Colleen Ballinger’s Experience in Social Media: Cancel Culture Chronicle
• Communication Patterns in Conflict Interactions in Premarital Couples Who Are in Abusive Relationships
• Social Media Use on Mental Health Outcomes among Adolescents and Young Adults in Port Harcourt City
• (Un)Successful Error Repairs in L2 Communication