From the actual study: "The algorithm studied here, with a prediction accuracy of r = .22, does not allow conclusively determining one’s political views, in th

From the actual study: "The algorithm studied here, with a prediction accuracy of r = .22, does not allow conclusively determining one’s political views, in the same way as job interviews, with a predictive accuracy of r = .20, cannot conclusively determine future job performance. Nevertheless, even moderately accurate algorithms can have a tremendous impact when applied to large populations in high-stakes contexts. For example, even crude estimates of people’s character traits can significantly improve the efficiency of online mass persuasion campaigns (Kosinski et al., 2013; Matz et al., 2017). Scholars, the public, and policymakers should take notice and consider tightening policies regulating the recording and processing of facial images." https://awspntest.apa.org/fulltext/2024-65164-001.html https://awspntest.apa.org/fulltext/2024-65164-001.html Compare that to the article: "A study recently published in the peer-reviewed American Psychologist journal claims that a combination of facial recognition and artificial intelligence technology can accurately assess a person’s political orientation by simply looking at that person’s blank, expressionless face." The article is misleading. You can't claim the model can accurately assess an individual's political orientation just because it performs better than random chance. Sure, it demonstrates there's a statistically-significant link between facial structure and political orientation, but claiming you can use it to "accurately assess a person’s political orientation" is absurd and not what the study found.