Using deepfakes for experiments in the social sciences - A pilot study
Open accessAbstract
The advent of deepfakes - the manipulation of audio records, images and videos based on deep learning techniques - has important implications for science and society. Current studies focus primarily on the detection and dangers of deepfakes. In contrast, less attention is paid to the potential of this technology for substantive research - particularly as an approach for controlled experimental manipulations in the social sciences. In this paper, we aim to fill this research gap and argue that deepfakes can be a valuable tool for conducting social science experiments. To demonstrate some of the potentials and pitfalls of deepfakes, we conducted a pilot study on the effects of physical attractiveness on student evaluations of teachers. To this end, we created a deepfake video varying the physical attractiveness of the instructor as compared to the original video and asked students to rate the presentation and instructor. First, our results show that social scientists without special knowledge in computer science can successfully create a credible deepfake within reasonable time. Student ratings of the quality of the two videos were comparable and students did not detect the deepfake. Second, we use deepfakes to examine a substantive research question: whether there are differences in the ratings of a physically more and a physically less attractive instructor. Our suggestive evidence points toward a beauty penalty. Thus, our study supports the idea that deepfakes can be used to introduce systematic variations into experiments while offering a high degree of experimental control. Finally, we discuss the feasibility of deepfakes as an experimental manipulation and the ethical challenges of using deepfakes in experiments.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In one study, when participants were asked to summarize the study's aim in their own words, none commented suspicion of video manipulation.
“When participants were asked to summarize the study ' s aim in their own words, none commented suspicion of video manipulation [34]”
From Human Performance in Deepfake Detection: A Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [34]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Deepfakes and beyond: A Survey of face manipulation and fake detection
Tolosana, R., Vera-Rodriguez, R., Fierrez, J., Morales, A., & Ortega-Garcia, J. (2020) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2020.06.014 · Cited by 1,237 · see citing works
Vaccari, C., & Chadwick, A. (2020) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305120903408 · Cited by 978 · see citing works
AI-synthesized faces are indistinguishable from real faces and more trustworthy
Nightingale, S. J., & Farid, H. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2120481119 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
Maras, M.-H., & Alexandrou, A. (2019) · The International Journal of Evidence & Proof · doi:10.1177/1365712718807226 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Do (microtargeted) deepfakes have real effects on political attitudes?
Dobber, T., Metoui, N., Trilling, D., Helberger, N., & de Vreese, C. (2021) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/1940161220944364 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Fooled twice – people cannot detect deepfakes but think they can
Köbis, N., Doležalová, B., & Soraperra, I. (2021) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3832978 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Fooled twice: People cannot detect deepfakes but think they can
Köbis, N. C., Doležalová, B., & Soraperra, I. (2021) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2021.103364 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
TweepFake: about detecting deepfake tweets
Fagni, T., Falchi, F., Gambini, M., Martella, A., & Tesconi, M. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0251415 · Cited by 185 · see citing works
Automated face swapping and its detection
Zhang, Y., Zheng, L., & Thing, V. L. L. (2017) · 2017 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Signal and Image Processing (ICSIP) · doi:10.1109/siprocess.2017.8124497 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Godulla, A., Hoffmann, C. P., & Seibert, D. (2021) · Studies in Communication and Media · doi:10.5771/2192-4007-2021-1-72 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Don't trust your eyes: image manipulation in the age of DeepFakes
Langguth, J., Pogorelov, K., Brenner, S., Filkuková, P., & Schroeder, D. T. (2021) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2021.632317 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Ternovski, J., Kalla, J., & Aronow, P. M. (2021) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/dta97 · Cited by 37 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Experiments using manipulated videos point in the same direction corroborating the claim that people cannot reliably detect deepfakes (Khodabakhsh et al., 2019; Köbis et al., 2021; Ternovski et al., 2021).”
Result
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 41
- Ahmed S. (2021). Navigating the maze: deepfakes, cognitive ability, and social media news skepticism. New Media Soc. 1– 22. 10.1177/14614448211019198 · DOI
- Andreoni J. Petrie R. (2008). Beauty, gender and stereotypes: evidence from laboratory experiments. J. Econ. Psychol. 29, 73– 93. 10.1016/j.joep.2007.07.008 · DOI
- Barrera D. Simpson B. (2012). Much ado about deception: consequences of deceiving research participants in the social sciences. Sociol. Methods Res. 41, 383– 413. 10.1177/0049124112452526 · DOI
- Bassili J. N. (1981). The attractiveness stereotype: goodness or glamour? Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 2, 235– 252. 10.1207/s15324834basp0204_1 · DOI
- Bernardi F. Chakhaia L. Leopold L. (2017). “Sing me a song with social significance”: the (mis)use of statistical significance testing in European sociological research, European sociological. Review. 33, 1– 15. 10.1093/esr/jcx044 · DOI
- Borges L. Martins B. Calado P. (2019). Combining similarity features and deep representation learning for stance detection in the context of checking fake news. J. Data Inf. Qual. 11, 1– 26. 10.1145/3287763 · DOI
- de Borst A. W. de Gelder B. (2015). Is it the real deal? Perception of virtual characters versus humans: an affective cognitive neuroscience perspective. Front. Psychol. 6, 1– 12. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00576 26029133 PMC4428060 · DOI
- de Ruiter A. (2021). The distinct wrong of deepfakes. Philos. Technol. 34, 1– 22. 10.1007/s13347-021-00459-233717860 · DOI · Paper page
- Dion K. Berscheid E. Walster E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 24, 285– 290. 10.1037/h0033731 4655540 · DOI · Paper page
- Eberl A. Kühn J. Wolbring T. (2022). Data & code: using deepfakes for experiments in the social sciences - a pilot study. GESIS datorium. 10.7802/2467 PMC9745035 36524213 · DOI
- Fallis D. (2020). The epistemic threat of deepfakes. Philos. Technol. 34, 1– 21. 10.1007/s13347-020-00419-2 32837868 PMC7406872 · DOI · Paper page
- Felton J. Koper P. T. Mitchell J. Stinson M. (2008). Attractiveness, easiness and other issues: Student evaluations of professors on ratemyprofessors.com. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 33, 45– 61. 10.1080/02602930601122803 · DOI
- Gamage D. Chen J. Sasahara K. (2021). The emergence of deepfakes and its societal implications: a systematic review. TTO. 2021, 28−39. Available online at: https://truthandtrustonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/TTO_2021_proceedings.pdf
- Hamermesh D. S. Parker A. (2005). Beauty in the classroom: instructors' pulchritude and putative pedagogical productivity. Econ. Educ. Rev. 24, 369– 376. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2004.07.013 · DOI
- Haut K. Wohn C. Antony V. Goldfarb A. Welsh M. Sumanthiran D.. (2021). Could you become more credible by being white? Assessing impact of race on credibility with deepfakes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.08054. 1– 10. 10.48550/arXiv.2102.08054 · DOI
- Hosoda M. Stone-Romero E. F. Coats G. (2003). The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: a meta-analysis of experimental studies. Pers. Psychol. 56, 431– 462. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00157.x · DOI
- Hughes S. Fried O. Ferguson M. Hughes C. Hughes R. Yao X.. (2021). Deepfaked online content is highly effective in manipulating people's attitudes and intentions. PsyArXiv. 1– 6. 10.31234/osf.io/4ms5a · DOI
- Isola P. Zhu J.-Y. Zhou T. Efros A. A. (2017). “Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks.” in: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Honolulu, HI), 1125− 1134. 10.1109/CVPR.2017.632 · DOI · Paper page
- Keres A. Chartier C. R. (2016). The biasing effects of visual background on perceived facial trustworthiness. Psi Chi J. Psychol. Res. 21, 170– 175. 10.24839/2164-8204.JN21.3.170 · DOI
- Khodabakhsh A. Ramachandra R. Busch C. (2019). “Subjective evaluation of media consumer vulnerability to fake audiovisual content” in: 2019 Eleventh International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX): IEEE. 1– 6. 10.1109/QoMEX.2019.8743316 · DOI
- Kietzmann J. Lee L. W. McCarthy I. P. Kietzmann T. C. (2020). Deepfakes: trick or treat? Bus. Horiz. 63, 135– 146. 10.1016/j.bushor.2019.11.006 · DOI · Paper page
- Konijn E. A. Hoorn J. F. (2020). Differential facial articulacy in robots and humans elicit different levels of responsiveness, empathy, and projected feelings. Robotics. 9, 1– 17. 10.3390/robotics9040092 · DOI
- Matern F. Riess C. Stamminger M. (2019). “Exploiting visual artifacts to expose deepfakes and face manipulations” in: 2019 IEEE Winter Applications of Computer Vision Workshops (WACVW): IEEE. 83– 92. 10.1109/WACVW.2019.00020 · DOI · Paper page
- Mehta V. Gupta P. Subramanian R. Dhall A. (2021). “Fakebuster: a deepfakes detection tool for video conferencing scenarios” in: 26th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces-Companion. 61– 63. 10.1145/3397482.3450726 · DOI
- Mori M. MacDorman K. F. Kageki N. (2012). The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 19, 98– 100. 10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811 · DOI · Paper page
- Mulford M. Orbell J. Shatto C. Stockard J. (1998). Physical attractiveness, opportunity, and success in everyday exchange. Am. J. Sociol. 103, 1565– 1592. 10.1086/231401 · DOI
- Pajunen T. Kukkonen I. Sarpila O. Åberg E. (2021). Systematic review of differences in socioeconomic outcomes of attractiveness between men and women. arXiv. 10.31235/osf.io/rmcqh · DOI
- Park T. Liu M.-Y. Wang T.-C. Zhu J.-Y. (2019). “Semantic image synthesis with spatially-adaptive normalization.” in: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Long Beach, CA), 2337– 2346. 10.1109/CVPR.2019.00244 · DOI · Paper page
- Paustian-Underdahl S. C. Walker L. S. (2016). Revisiting the beauty is beastly effect: examining when and why sex and attractiveness impact hiring judgments. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 27, 1034– 1058. 10.1080/09585192.2015.1053963 · DOI
- Perov I. Gao D. Chervoniy N. Liu K. Marangonda S. Umé C.. (2020). DeepFaceLab: integrated, flexible and extensible face-swapping framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.05535. 1– 10. 10.48550/arXiv.2005.05535 · DOI
- Qayyum A. Qadir J. Janjua M. U. Sher F. (2019). Using blockchain to rein in the new post-truth world and check the spread of fake news. IT Prof. 21, 16– 24. 10.1109/MITP.2019.2910503 · DOI
- Reed S. Akata Z. Yan X. Logeswaran L. Schiele B. Lee H. (2016). “Generative adversarial text to image synthesis.” in: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning. 1060– 1069. 10.48550/arXiv.1605.0539633631607 · DOI · Paper page
- Riggio R. E. Widaman K. F. Tucker J. S. Salinas C. (1991). Beauty is more than skin deep: components of attractiveness. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. 12, 423– 439. 10.1207/s15324834basp1204_4 · DOI
- Rubenstein A. J. (2005). Variation in perceived attractiveness: differences between dynamic and static faces. Psychol. Sci. 16, 759– 762. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01610.x 16181436 · DOI
- Trinh L. Liu Y. (2021). An examination of fairness of ai models for deepfake detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.00558. 1– 9. 10.24963/ijcai.2021/79 · DOI · Paper page
- Verdoliva L. (2020). Media forensics and deepfakes: an overview. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process. 14, 910– 932. 10.1109/JSTSP.2020.3002101 · DOI · Paper page
- Weisman W. D. Peña J. F. (2021). Face the uncanny: the effects of doppelganger talking head avatars on affect-based trust toward artificial intelligence technology are mediated by uncanny valley perceptions. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 24, 182– 187. 10.1089/cyber.2020.0175 33646048 · DOI
- Welker C. France D. Henty A. Wheatley T. (2020). Trading faces: complete AI face doubles avoid the uncanny valley. Preprint from PsyArXiv. 1– 11. 10.31234/osf.io/pykjr · DOI
- Westerlund M. (2019). The emergence of deepfake technology: a review. Technol. Innov. Manag. Rev. 9, 39– 52. 10.22215/timreview/1282 · DOI · Paper page
- Wolbring T. Riordan P. (2016). How beauty works. Theoretical mechanisms and two empirical applications on students' evaluation of teaching. Soc. Sci. Res. 57, 253– 272. 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2015.12.009 26973043 · DOI
- Zhu J.-Y. Park T. Isola P. Efros A. A. (2017). “Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks.” in: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Honolulu, HI), 2223– 2232. 10.1109/ICCV.2017.244 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Human performance in detecting deepfakes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 56 papers
Diel, A., Lalgi, T., Schröter, I. C., MacDorman, K. F., Teufel, M., & Bäuerle, A. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100538 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Human Performance in Deepfake Detection: A Systematic Review
Somoray, K., Miller, D. J., & Holmes, M. (2025) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1155/hbe2/1833228 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
- Authors
- Eberl, A., Kühn, J., & Wolbring, T.
- Affiliations
- Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Kühn, Juliane
- Venue
- Frontiers in Sociology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2022-11-29
- Volume
- 7
- Pages
- 907199-907199
- ISSN
- 2297-7775 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9745035
- OpenAlex
- W4310183460
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 11.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Sociology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- OPUS FAU (Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV), on behalf of the Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen-Nürnberg) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Names, Identity, and Discrimination Research
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- deepfakes, experimental manipulation, physical attractiveness, student evaluations of teachers, deepfake detection, experimental control, research ethics, social science experiments
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review