Connect with us

STM Blog

AI-generated images can exploit how your mind works − here’s why they fool you and how to spot them

Arryn Robbins discusses the challenges of recognizing AI-generated images due to human cognitive limitations and inattentional blindness, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking in a visually fast-paced online environment.

Published

on

Last Updated on June 2, 2025 by Daily News Staff

Arryn Robbins, University of Richmond

I’m more of a scroller than a poster on social media. Like many people, I wind down at the end of the day with a scroll binge, taking in videos of Italian grandmothers making pasta or baby pygmy hippos frolicking.

For a while, my feed was filled with immaculately designed tiny homes, fueling my desire for a minimalist paradise. Then, I started seeing AI-generated images; many contained obvious errors, such as staircases to nowhere or sinks within sinks. Yet, commenters rarely pointed them out, instead admiring the aesthetic.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=948015667455503&set=gm.665399635824007&idorvanity=351768197187154

These images were clearly AI-generated and didn’t depict reality. Did people just not notice? Not care?

As a cognitive psychologist, I’d guess “yes” and “yes.” My expertise is in how people process and use visual information. I primarily investigate how people look for objects and information visually, from the mundane searches of daily life, such as trying to find a dropped earring, to more critical searches, like those conducted by radiologists or search-and-rescue teams.

With my understanding of how people process images and notice − or don’t notice − detail, it’s not surprising to me that people aren’t tuning in to the fact that many images are AI-generated.

We’ve been here before

The struggle to detect AI-generated images mirrors past detection challenges such as spotting photoshopped images or computer-generated images in movies.

But there’s a key difference: Photo editing and CGI require intentional design by artists, while AI images are generated by algorithms trained on datasets, often without human oversight. The lack of oversight can lead to imperfections or inconsistencies that can feel unnatural, such as the unrealistic physics or lack of consistency between frames that characterize what’s sometimes called “AI slop.”

Despite these differences, studies show people struggle to distinguish real images from synthetic ones, regardless of origin. Even when explicitly asked to identify images as real, synthetic or AI-generated, accuracy hovers near the level of chance, meaning people did only a little better than if they’d just guessed.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

In everyday interactions, where you aren’t actively scrutinizing images, your ability to detect synthetic content might even be weaker.

Attention shapes what you see, what you miss

Spotting errors in AI images requires noticing small details, but the human visual system isn’t wired for that when you’re casually scrolling. Instead, while online, people take in the gist of what they’re viewing and can overlook subtle inconsistencies.

Visual attention operates like a zoom lens: You scan broadly to get an overview of your environment or phone screen, but fine details require focused effort. Human perceptual systems evolved to quickly assess environments for any threats to survival, with sensitivity to sudden changes − such as a quick-moving predator − sacrificing precision for speed of detection.

This speed-accuracy trade-off allows for rapid, efficient processing, which helped early humans survive in natural settings. But it’s a mismatch with modern tasks such as scrolling through devices, where small mistakes or unusual details in AI-generated images can easily go unnoticed.

People also miss things they aren’t actively paying attention to or looking for. Psychologists call this inattentional blindness: Focusing on one task causes you to overlook other details, even obvious ones. In the famous invisible gorilla study, participants asked to count basketball passes in a video failed to notice someone in a gorilla suit walking through the middle of the scene.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo?wmode=transparent&start=0]
If you’re counting how many passes the people in white make, do you even notice someone walk through in a gorilla suit?

Similarly, when your focus is on the broader content of an AI image, such as a cozy tiny home, you’re less likely to notice subtle distortions. In a way, the sixth finger in an AI image is today’s invisible gorilla − hiding in plain sight because you’re not looking for it.

Efficiency over accuracy in thinking

Our cognitive limitations go beyond visual perception. Human thinking uses two types of processing: fast, intuitive thinking based on mental shortcuts, and slower, analytical thinking that requires effort. When scrolling, our fast system likely dominates, leading us to accept images at face value.

Adding to this issue is the tendency to seek information that confirms your beliefs or reject information that goes against them. This means AI-generated images are more likely to slip by you when they align with your expectations or worldviews. If an AI-generated image of a basketball player making an impossible shot jibes with a fan’s excitement, they might accept it, even if something feels exaggerated.

While not a big deal for tiny home aesthetics, these issues become concerning when AI-generated images may be used to influence public opinion. For example, research shows that people tend to assume images are relevant to accompanying text. Even when the images provide no actual evidence, they make people more likely to accept the text’s claims as true.

Misleading real or generated images can make false claims seem more believable and even cause people to misremember real events. AI-generated images have the power to shape opinions and spread misinformation in ways that are difficult to counter.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1010254754457256&set=a.407186301430774

Beating the machine

While AI gets better at detecting AI, humans need tools to do the same. Here’s how:

  1. Trust your gut. If something feels off, it probably is. Your brain expertly recognizes objects and faces, even under varying conditions. Perhaps you’ve experienced what psychologists call the uncanny valley and felt unease with certain humanoid faces. This experience shows people can detect anomalies, even when they can’t fully explain what’s wrong.
  2. Scan for clues. AI struggles with certain elements: hands, text, reflections, lighting inconsistencies and unnatural textures. If an image seems suspicious, take a closer look.
  3. Think critically. Sometimes, AI generates photorealistic images with impossible scenarios. If you see a political figure casually surprising baristas or a celebrity eating concrete, ask yourself: Does this make sense? If not, it’s probably fake.
  4. Check the source. Is the poster a real person? Reverse image search can help trace a picture’s origin. If the metadata is missing, it might be generated by AI.

AI-generated images are becoming harder to spot. During scrolling, the brain processes visuals quickly, not critically, making it easy to miss details that reveal a fake. As technology advances, slow down, look closer and think critically.The Conversation

Arryn Robbins, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Richmond

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


A beautiful kitchen to scroll past – but check out the clock. Tiny Homes via Facebook
AI-generated images

https://stmdailynews.com/space-force-faces-new-challenge-tracking-debris-from-intelsat-33e-breakdown/

Continue Reading
Advertisement SodaStream USA, inc

Blog

There’s Only One Race: Human—A Message of Unity That Must Not Erase Reality

Published

on

The phrase “There’s only one race: human” is simple, hopeful and deeply appealing. It reminds us that beneath differences in skin color, ancestry, nationality and culture, we are members of the same human family.

Diverse people standing together to represent one human family
Diverse people standing together to represent one human family

We share the same basic needs. We want safety, dignity, opportunity, love and a better future for the people we care about. No racial category makes one person more human—or more deserving of respect—than another.

At its best, the phrase rejects the false idea that humanity is divided into separate biological races with different levels of intelligence, character or worth. Those beliefs have been used throughout history to justify slavery, segregation, colonialism and discrimination. Saying that there is only one human race can therefore be a powerful declaration of equality.

But the meaning of the phrase depends on how we use it.

Shared Humanity Does Not Mean Identical Experiences

Although race does not separate people into distinct biological types, racial categories still carry enormous social power. They have shaped laws, neighborhoods, schools, employment, policing, health care and access to wealth. Their consequences do not disappear simply because we say that everyone is human.

That is why “There’s only one race: human” should never become another way of saying, “I don’t see color,” when someone is describing racism or inequality.

Ignoring race does not automatically end racism. In some situations, it can prevent us from recognizing it.

If one group repeatedly encounters barriers that others do not, acknowledging those differences is not an attempt to divide people. It is part of understanding the problem honestly. We cannot repair an injustice that we refuse to see.

Our Differences Are Not the Problem

Human unity does not require sameness. Our cultural identities, traditions, histories and communities are not obstacles that must be erased before we can respect one another.

There is nothing contradictory about celebrating Black history, Latino heritage, Indigenous traditions, Asian American experiences or the many cultures that contribute to our society while also believing in our common humanity.

The problem is not that people have differences. The problem begins when those differences are assigned a hierarchy—when one identity is treated as the standard and another as inferior, threatening or less deserving.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

Real unity allows people to bring their complete identities into the room. It does not demand that they leave their histories at the door.

A Statement That Should Lead to Action

If we truly believe there is only one human race, that belief should influence how we treat people. It should lead us to oppose discrimination even when we are not its target. It should make us question stereotypes, listen to experiences different from our own and defend the dignity of people whose backgrounds we may not fully understand.

Shared humanity is more than a comforting slogan. It is a responsibility.

It asks us to recognize that another person’s pain matters, even when it is unfamiliar to us. It reminds us that no community is disposable and that injustice against one group ultimately damages the society we all share.

One Human Family, Many Human Stories

To me, “There’s only one race: human” is most meaningful when it brings two truths together: we are fundamentally equal, and we do not all experience the world in the same way.

We can affirm that there is one human family without pretending racism has disappeared. We can value what connects us without erasing what makes our communities distinct. We can pursue unity while still confronting the inequalities that stand in its way.

Perhaps the fullest version of the message is this:

We are one human family. Our differences deserve respect, our histories deserve acknowledgment, and every person deserves equal dignity.

That is not merely an ideal. It is a standard by which we can judge our choices, our institutions and the kind of world we are building together.

What does the phrase “There’s only one race: human” mean to you? Share your perspective in the comments.

Sources and Related Links

Stay Informed. Stay Curious.

Get the latest news, thoughtful commentary, inspiring stories and useful information delivered directly to your inbox. Subscribe to the STM Daily News newsletter and never miss the stories that inform, educate and connect our communities.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

Sign up today—it’s free!

View recent photos

Unlock fun facts & lost history—get The Knowledge in your inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

California and Minnesota Face $1B Medicaid Funding Hold

The Trump administration is withholding more than $1 billion in Medicaid funding from California and Minnesota over disputed medical claims. A social-policy historian examines how concerns about fraud have historically been used to justify funding cuts and undermine public confidence in Medicaid.

Published

on

Agents, many wearing jackets or vests emblazoned with 'FBI,' exit a building with what appears to be a trove of documents.Medicaid Funding.
Federal agents execute a search in December 2025 tied to potential Medicaid fraud in Bloomington, Minn. Christopher Juhn/Anadolu via Getty Images

Ben Zdencanovic, University of Cambridge

California and Minnesota Face $1B Medicaid Funding Hold

The Trump administration announced on July 21, 2026, that it’s withholding US$867 million in federal healthcare funding for California and $200 million for Minnesota – a total of more than $1 billion.

Federal officials said the two states had failed to provide sufficient evidence that a number of disputed medical claims were legitimate. These include bills for in-home care and other services covered by the two states’ Medicaid programs for low-income residents.

Medicaid administrators say the funds can be recovered if the states supply the requested documentation. But the action is highly unusual: Typically, Medicaid officials partner with states to conduct an audit when they suspect fraud, a careful process that often takes years.

It’s the second time in 2026 that the Trump administration has withheld or deferred federal Medicaid funds for several states, including California and Minnesota, because of alleged fraud and abuse. The Democratic governors of those states have called the decision a politically motivated attack on their constituents.

I’m a historian of social policy who led the first comprehensive historical overview of Medi-Cal, California’s statewide Medicaid system. I’ve found that U.S. leaders have long used the language of fraud and abuse to blur the line between correcting very real failures within Medicaid and – as I believe the Trump administration is currently doing – discrediting and defunding the program itself.

Who pays when Medicaid is cut? It affects children’s health care, nursing home care, disability services and health insurance.

Slashing the safety net

The Medicaid restrictions are part of the Trump administration’s overall efforts to slash federal funding for the safety net.

The large tax-and-spending bill that Trump signed into law in July 2025 as the cornerstone of his second-term agenda pared eligibility for Medicaid by introducing work requirements for some adults. It is cutting close to $1 trillion in federal spending on the program over the next decade.

Researchers estimate that almost 12 million people, on top of the estimated 28 million without health insurance in 2025, could become uninsured by 2034 due to these changes. By mid-2026, more than 3 million people had already lost their insurance coverage due to Republican changes to the Affordable Care Act.

‘Padlocking’ the ‘cookie jar’

In February 2026, Vice President JD Vance, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, announced a new anti-fraud initiative called Comprehensive Regulations to Uncover Suspicious Healthcare.

Also known by its rather unsubtle acronym, CRUSH, this initiative is taking unprecedented steps to withhold and defer funds in response to suspected fraud. “CMS is done trying to catch fraudsters with their hands in the cookie jar,” Oz said in announcing CRUSH’s formation. “Instead, we’re padlocking the jar and letting them starve.”

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

To be sure, Medicaid fraud, waste and abuse – such as providers billing Medicaid for services that are unnecessary or never rendered – are very real problems that cost taxpayers billions of dollars annually. They do divert funds from the low-income and disabled Americans enrolled in the program.

But the Trump administration’s latest moves are part of a much broader history of weaponizing Medicaid fraud and abuse – both real and imagined. I see them as a politicized attempt to prove that Medicaid itself is wasteful, that state governments cannot be trusted to administer federal money, and that public benefits inevitably invite dishonesty.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. points to a chart pertaining to Medicaid fraud.
Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks about alleged Medicaid fraud and charges in Minneapolis in May 2026. Christopher Juhn/Anadolu via Getty Images

Providing little oversight at the start

Medicaid was established, along with Medicare for older adults, in 1965 as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” reforms. Despite providing millions of Americans with health insurance coverage for the first time, these programs had few centralized mechanisms for the kind of federal oversight that could prevent and catch fraud and abuse.

And the sheer scale and complexity of the Medicaid system – joint federal-state funding, varying eligibility requirements, millions of enrollees and thousands of providers – created opportunities for questionable billing practices among providers.

The 1970s saw a number of highly publicized Medicaid scandals involving nursing homes, laboratories, pharmacies and so-called “Medicaid mills” – healthcare providers that sought to bill the government for large numbers of Medicaid patients for shoddy and often fraudulent care.

A series of high-profile congressional investigations spurred demand for stronger Medicaid oversight and enforcement. That led to the Medicare-Medicaid Anti-Fraud and Abuse Amendments of 1977, which established the national Medicaid Fraud Control Units program.

The state-run Medicaid Fraud Control Units received generous federal matching funds to investigate and prosecute fraud.

The most serious Medicaid fraud was generally committed by healthcare providers and contractors, not patients. Medicaid Fraud Control Units were principally responsible for investigating providers, while also prosecuting the abuse and neglect of patients whose care was billed to Medicaid.

At the same time, however, Medicaid was becoming entangled in a broader political debate over social spending, whether many Americans were becoming too dependent on government benefits, and the alleged use of benefits by people who should not have received them. In the 1980s and 1990s, widely circulated stories about Medicaid exposed fraud and malfeasance by providers.

But disproportionately, they also highlighted the comparatively few instances of fraud by people enrolled in the program, such as cases where they submitted false receipts for covered medically related travel or sold drugs they obtained through Medicaid for free or at low cost.

Using Medicare fraud to justify spending cuts

The distinction between Medicaid and cash assistance programs, such as the Aid to Families with Dependent Children “welfare” program, frequently disappeared in political rhetoric. False or exaggerated stories that portrayed African American single mothers living extravagantly while fraudulently claiming welfare benefits became potent symbols of supposed government failure.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

While campaigning as a presidential candidate, Ronald Reagan seized on this trope of the “welfare queen” in his attacks on social spending.

A large crowd of people wait on lines in a black and white photo from the 1970s.
People line up at the Baltimore City Welfare Office in 1975, years before concerns about social spending led to big cuts to safety net programs. O’Halloran/Library of Congress via Getty Images

By the mid-1990s, opposition to welfare programs had become increasingly bipartisan. Politicians in both parties often used tales of Medicaid fraud on the part of providers and recipients to justify tighter eligibility rules and spending cuts.

Federal oversight expanded further with the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which created the Medicaid Integrity Program and strengthened federal oversight of state programs. The Affordable Care Act, the landmark healthcare legislation Congress passed in 2010, added new measures to screen providers and verify billing.

Concerns about Medicaid’s “integrity” became highly politicized in the debates surrounding the ACA. Critics of Medicaid expansion argued that increasing the number of people who could get health insurance through the program would increase fraud and improper enrollment. Supporters of expanding Medicaid to help more Americans gain health insurance maintained that anti-fraud rhetoric often disguised ideological opposition to the program’s expansion.

Blurring distinctions then and now

For the six decades that this program has helped millions of low-income Americans get healthcare, politicians have blurred the distinction between protecting Medicaid from abuse and using abuse to discredit Medicaid itself.

In my view, the Trump administration’s campaigns against California and Minnesota continue that pattern. It is using real weaknesses within Medicaid to advance much broader political arguments: that Democratic states cannot be trusted, that public benefits naturally invite abuse, and that withholding funds is itself a form of reform.

The result will no doubt be that fewer low-income Americans will be able to get the healthcare they need.

Ben Zdencanovic, Assistant Professor of U.S. History, University of Cambridge

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

💪 Your health journey starts here! Explore the latest health news, fitness tips, wellness trends, and healthy living advice. Share your thoughts in the comments and subscribe to the STM Daily News newsletter to stay informed and inspired every day.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage
Continue Reading

Lifestyle

P.F. Chang’s Partners With Starlight Children’s Foundation for New “Spirit of the Zodiac” Giving Campaign

P.F. Chang’s launches Spirit of the Zodiac, a giving campaign supporting Starlight Children’s Foundation with Bao plush purchases and in-restaurant donations.

Published

on

P.F. Chang’s Launches Spirit of the Zodiac Campaign to Support Starlight Children’s Foundation
P.F. Chang’s and Starlight Children’s Foundation

P.F. Chang’s Launches Spirit of the Zodiac Campaign to Support Starlight Children’s Foundation

P.F. Chang’s is launching a new annual charitable initiative designed to bring comfort to children during hospital stays. The Scottsdale-based restaurant brand announced Spirit of the Zodiac, a giving program inspired by the Chinese zodiac, with its inaugural campaign—Year of the Fire Horse: Spirit of Strength—benefiting Starlight Children’s Foundation.

What the campaign supports

Starlight Children’s Foundation serves more than 800 children’s hospitals nationwide, providing programs such as toy deliveries, hospital gowns, gaming stations, and other experiences intended to help kids feel more comfortable, connected, and supported during medical care.

How guests can participate (Sept. 2–Sept. 30)

From September 2 through September 30, 2026, guests can purchase Bao, a limited-edition horse plushie, for $10 through dine-in transactions at participating P.F. Chang’s restaurants (while supplies last). For each Bao purchased, P.F. Chang’s will donate an identical Bao plushie to Starlight for distribution through its hospital network—up to 20,000 donated plushies.

Guests can also support the campaign by rounding up their checks or making a direct donation in restaurant. The overall effort aims to raise $500,000 to support Starlight’s work with children and families.

Bonus offer for donors

P.F. Chang’s says guests who purchase Bao or make an in-restaurant donation of $10 or more to Starlight will receive an offer for a complimentary appetizer with the purchase of an entrée on a future dine-in visit, valid through October 31, 2026 (restrictions apply; participating locations only).

A story component for families

The campaign also includes a storytelling element: Bao’s journey will be featured in a digital story and an original children’s book by author Jenny Liao and illustrator Adriane Tsai, expected to publish later this month.

What to watch for

P.F. Chang’s and Starlight plan to continue the partnership beyond September, including in-hospital catering and plush deliveries in early October.

For more information, visit www.pfchangs.com/offers/spirit-of-the-zodiac. To learn more about the partnership, visit starlight.org/pfchangs.

💪 Your health journey starts here! Explore the latest health news, fitness tips, wellness trends, and healthy living advice. Share your thoughts in the comments and subscribe to the STM Daily News newsletter to stay informed and inspired every day.

Continue Reading

Trending