Citation Integrity™ 101 · Module 2 of 9

Would a careful expert actually consult this source?

Source Authority is the first filter — before anything else about a claim is judged, Citation Integrity™ asks whether the place it’s published is the kind of source a reasonable expert on that subject would consult.

Module 2

What Source Authority checks

This Dimension checks whether the domain, publication or repository has a track record on the topic, whether it’s the kind of source a reasonable expert would consult, and whether it carries the independence and topical depth the claim requires.

A source can be authoritative on one subject and out of its depth on another — Source Authority is evaluated per claim, not as a blanket score for a whole domain.

Worked examples

The same claim, two different outcomes.

Concrete cases are the fastest way to see how this Dimension behaves in practice.

Fails

A personal blog with no track record on the subject publishes a detailed claim about cardiac surgery technique. The author has no visible medical background, and the site has never covered clinical topics before. Even if the specific post reads confidently, the source itself isn’t the kind a careful reader — or an AI system — would treat as authoritative on surgical technique.

Passes

The same claim, published by a hospital’s own clinical guidance page or in a peer-reviewed cardiology journal. The source’s track record and topical depth match the weight of the claim being made.

Quick check

Two questions before you move on.

Ungraded and untracked — just a comprehension nudge.

1Source Authority is judged per-domain overall, or per-claim against the specific subject?

2A well-written post on an off-topic blog can still fail Source Authority — true or false?

Finish this module

Mark it complete and keep going.

Previous module Back to the course

Your progress