cs.CLAug 27, 2026

RCMN: Understanding Misleadingness in Influential Public Discourse

Authors: Peiling Yi

Organizations: School of Computer Science and Mathematics Faculty of Engineering, Computing and the Environment Kingston University London, United Kingdom

Abstract

Influential public discourse shapes public beliefs and can also mislead, not only through what is stated, but also through how information is framed, omitted, contextualised, and communicated. Yet less research has focused on how such misleadingness arises and shapes the interpretations formed by readers. To address this gap, we introduce Reader-Centric Misleadingness Understanding (RCMN), a framework that operationalises misleadingness through five dimensions: misleading mechanism, likely reader interpretation, evidence-warranted interpretation, emotional arousal, and communicative intent. Based on this framework, we construct an evidence-grounded dataset of influential public discourse. Empirical findings show that misleadingness is diverse and extends well beyond fabrication, with unsupported inference, exaggeration, and omission among the prevalent mechanisms, and is frequently associated with heightened emotional arousal and distortive communicative intent. Moreover, we investigate whether lightweight claim-and-context representations retain sufficient cues for understanding reader-centric misleadingness without access to richer contextual, evidential, and multimodal information. Evaluation across five recent generative foundation models shows that reader-level interpretations can often be recovered from such limited representations, whereas identifying how misleadingness is produced remains considerably more challenging. These findings highlight the potential of lightweight representations for scalable misleadingness analysis, while reliable understanding of misleading mechanisms continues to require richer contextual and evidential grounding.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

CardsList
  1. A Cognitively Grounded Bayesian Framework for Misinformation Susceptibility

    May 10, 2026Pranava MadhyasthaComputational Cognitive ModelingBayesian Inference

  2. True (VIS) Lies: Analyzing How Generative AI Recognizes Intentionality, Rhetoric, and Misleadingness in Visualization Lies

    Apr 1, 2026Graziano Blasilli, Marco AngeliniData VisualizationVLM Evaluation

  3. Janus: A Benchmark for Goal-Conditioned Information Distortion in LLMs

    Jun 9, 2026Polydoros Giannouris, Mohsinul Kabir, Sophia AnaniadouLLM EvaluationDeception in Language Models