Research & Analysis / Source Summaries
Assess author authority, publication quality, funding sources, and citation count — with a final trust score.
Why This Prompt Exists
A source can be wrong even if it’s published. A source can be right even if it’s obscure. You need a way to tell.
You get:
- citing industry white papers as if they’re peer-reviewed research
- trusting experts outside their domain of expertise
- missing funding conflicts that bias findings
- elevating popular sources over rigorous ones
- no systematic way to decide which source to trust when they disagree
But credibility can be assessed:
- author: credentials, affiliation, track record, domain expertise
- publication: peer review status, reputation, impact factor
- funding: industry sponsorship, government grants, no conflicts
- citations: how often cited, by whom, in what context
- consistency: does this source align with other credible sources?
Without evaluation, you trust based on familiarity, not quality.
This prompt produces a structured credibility assessment and trust score.
The Prompt
Assume the role of a research librarian who evaluates source credibility. Your task is to assess a source's trustworthiness across multiple dimensions. Generate: 1. SOURCE IDENTIFICATION - Title, author(s), publication, date, URL/DOI 2. AUTHOR AUTHORITY - Credentials: [Degrees, affiliations, relevant expertise] - Track record: [Other publications on this topic, citation count] - Authority score: [High / Medium / Low] - Note if author is outside their domain of expertise 3. PUBLICATION QUALITY - Peer review status: [Peer-reviewed / Editorial review / Self-published / Unknown] - Publication reputation: [Top-tier journal / Well-regarded / Unknown / Predatory] - Quality score: [High / Medium / Low] 4. FUNDING & CONFLICTS - Funding source(s): [Industry / Government / Nonprofit / Self / Unknown] - Potential bias direction: [Favors industry / Favors position / None apparent] - Conflict score: [Low risk / Medium risk / High risk] 5. CITATION ANALYSIS - Citation count (if available): [Number] - Citation context: [Supportive / Mixed / Critical / Unknown] - Influence score: [High / Medium / Low] 6. OVERALL CREDIBILITY SCORE - 10 (Gold standard) to 1 (Do not cite) - One-sentence justification 7. WHEN TO CITE THIS SOURCE - Best use case - Use with caution for what claims - Do not use for what claims INPUTS: Source (article, report, or website): [PASTE OR PROVIDE URL] Known information about author (optional): [E.G., "Professor at Stanford, 20 years in field"] Your field: [E.G., "Organizational psychology"] RULES: - Flag industry-funded research — it's not automatically invalid, but needs scrutiny - Distinguish between "cited" and "cited positively" - Note that citation count favors older papers (age-adjust if possible) - Be cautious with self-published sources (blogs, LinkedIn, personal websites) - Remember: credible source ≠ correct source (evaluate claims separately)
How To Use It
- Run this before citing any source in an important document or presentation.
- Pay attention to funding conflicts — they’re the most common source of bias.
- Don’t cite low-credibility sources unless you’re citing them as examples of bad arguments.
- When two credible sources disagree, dig into methodology, not just credentials.
- Update credibility assessments over time — a source can become more or less credible.
Example Input
Source:
“Blog post: ‘Why Remote Work Is a Disaster’ by a LinkedIn influencer with 50k followers. No citations. Author’s bio: ‘CEO of a commercial real estate firm.’ Published on company blog. No funding disclosure.”
Your field:
“Future of work / HR”
Why It Works
Most people evaluate credibility by gut feeling — “this seems legit” — which is highly unreliable.
This framework improves outcomes by forcing:
- author authority check (who wrote this and why should we care?)
- publication quality review (where was this published?)
- funding conflict detection (who paid for this research?)
- citation analysis (how has the field received this work?)
- explicit trust score (not a vague feeling)
- usage guidance (when to cite, when to avoid)
Great credibility evaluation doesn’t just judge — it tells you how to use the source appropriately.
Build Better AI Systems
Subscribe for advanced prompt engineering, AI coding tools, debugging frameworks, and practical strategies for developers and engineers.