Review of an manuscript submitted to the conference

Article’s title

Visual Disinformation: Challenges of Trust and Security

Does the paper match the scope of the conference?

Yes

Does the paper title reflect the content and purpose of the article?

Yes

Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished?

Yes

Does the paper embrace contemporary issues in the area?

Yes

Is the paper clearly written and easily understood?

Understood with effort

Do conclusions illustrate the research results, findings, and recommendations, providing suggestions for future research?

Yes

Are the references full and grounded?

Yes

Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article

While the paper successfully conceptualizes the dual trust challenge and introduces a robust 7-criterion framework for content verification, it remains strictly conceptual and analytical without empirical validation. Specifically, the study does not include experimental user testing or empirical metrics to demonstrate how effectively human decision-makers (e.g., students or analysts) can apply these seven criteria under time-sensitive or high-stress security scenarios.

I confirm that there is no conflict of interest regarding the reviewed paper

✔

I confirm that I have the appropriate expertise to review this paper

✔