The idea, in plain English
Start here.
A citation gives you a source to inspect. Verify that it is the intended document, find the passage behind the claim and compare the wording, dates and conditions. A working link does not prove the answer is correct. If you cannot inspect the support, mark the claim unverified rather than filling the gap with confidence.
An answer says a museum is open every evening and links to the museum’s real website. That looks reassuring. But the linked page describes one special evening event. The source exists; the broad opening-hours claim still fails. This lesson gives you a small, repeatable way to catch that mismatch.
A few words you’ll meet.
OPEN WHAT YOU NEED ↙Source identity
Whether the linked document matches the title, publisher, date or version claimed in the answer.
Claim support
Whether the actual passage establishes the specific statement, including its conditions and level of certainty.
Qualifier
A limit that changes the meaning, such as one event date, one product version, ‘may’ or ‘in this sample.’
Unverified
The available evidence has not established the claim. This does not automatically mean it is false or that a source was fabricated.
Split the answer into things you can check
Copy the exact statement before revising it. Separate names, quantities, dates and recommendations when they need different evidence. ‘The museum opens every evening and entry is free’ contains at least two factual promises. A source supporting one does not automatically support both.
Start with the claims that affect the reader’s decision. For a planned visit, the actual date, hours, ticket conditions and location matter more than a polished introductory description. Keep the review manageable without pretending an unchecked sentence has been confirmed.
Follow the reference to the actual document
Open the reference attached to the claim where the interface makes that relationship available. Check the real publisher, document title and applicable date or version. A general source list may contain related material that was not evidence for this particular sentence. A search preview is only a lead; it can omit the condition you need.
If a link fails or requires access you do not have, look for an accessible original record or another appropriate source. Do not silently treat the preview as a completed reading. An unavailable page, a missing record in one search tool and a fabricated reference are different possibilities. Record what happened without asserting more than you know.
A link can pass. A claim can fail.
Compare the passage with the exact wording
Find the relevant passage and read the surrounding context. Compare the subject, date, place, amount and conditions. In the museum example, an announcement for Friday’s special event does not establish ordinary opening hours on every evening. A statement about one location does not automatically cover the whole organization.
Ask whether the answer adds certainty or a causal explanation that the source does not supply. ‘May help’ is weaker than ‘will work.’ An observation after a change is not proof that the change caused it. Preserve the strongest supported statement and separate your interpretation from the record.
Save a verdict someone else can review
Use a short claim log: original wording, source, supporting location, relevant scope and verdict. Supported means the inspected evidence fits the statement. Partly supported means only some of it fits. Contradicted means the evidence conflicts with it. Unverified means the check did not establish it. These are useful editorial labels, not a universal scoring standard.
For an important or disputed conclusion, inspect appropriate independent evidence and the original record where possible. Several copies of one announcement do not become several independent observations. If sources differ, explain the different dates or definitions before choosing a conclusion. Asking an assistant to reassure you can help organize further work, but it does not supply the missing external evidence.
- Retain the wording that was checked.
- Identify the inspected passage and applicable conditions.
- Rewrite or remove unsupported additions.
- Keep unresolved evidence gaps explicit.
A real source with an overextended claim
Fictional source record: ‘North Room Museum: Evening Opening, Friday 14 May, 6–9 pm. Event ticket required.’ No ordinary-hours or price schedule is supplied.
| Generated claim | Source check | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| The museum is open every evening | The record describes one Friday event | Not supported by this record |
| There is a 6–9 pm event on the stated Friday | Matches the supplied event record | Supported within this fictional record |
| Entry is free | Ticket required, but no price supplied | Unverified; required does not establish price |
Put it into practice
Repair the museum recommendation
A fictional AI answer recommends visiting North Room Museum any evening for free. Use only the event record in the example.
- Separate the recurring-hours and free-entry claims.
- Identify the exact event date and hours the record supports.
- Write a narrow supported statement.
- Mark the everyday-hours and price questions unresolved.
- Describe the responsible current source you would seek before planning a real visit.
Keep your working notes in your own document. This page saves only your completion check, not your answers or customer data.
Check your understanding
Make the call.
Choose an answer for each question. Then compare the reasoning.
You have a useful next step.
- A citation is an inspectable lead, not a completed fact check.
- Match the claim’s wording and conditions to the source passage.
- Keep a verdict and explain what is still unknown.
Completion is your own learning record. Quiz scores and practice checks are saved separately, on this browser.
Sources & context
The sources below explain the factual foundations and editorial methods used in this lesson. Worked examples, planning models and exercises are illustrative teaching material.
- Learnetto: How to verify citations in an AI answer
Secondary editorial workflow for separating existence, identity, support and suitability. Its historical experiment rates are not used here.
- AOFIRS: How to verify AI-generated answers and citations
Secondary verification workflow, including source context, scope and an explicit review record. No quantitative research claim is reproduced.