Key Takeaway
AI amplifies E-E-A-T requirements because AI systems read your page directly to evaluate trust — they can't rely on backlinks alone. Author attribution, publication dates, and verifiable credentials are now critical ranking factors.
What Is E-E-A-T?
E-E-A-T stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trust. It is Google’s framework for evaluating content quality, originally introduced as E-A-T in the 2014 Quality Rater Guidelines and expanded to E-E-A-T in December 2022 with the addition of Experience.
E-E-A-T is not a ranking algorithm or a score — it is a set of qualitative criteria that Google’s human quality raters use to evaluate search results. However, Google has repeatedly confirmed that its ranking systems aim to surface content that demonstrates these qualities.
In the context of AI search, E-E-A-T matters more than ever — but the mechanism is different. Traditional search engines use backlinks, domain authority, and user engagement as proxies for trust. AI systems evaluate trust by reading the page itself. They look for verifiable signals directly in the content: author credentials, source citations, publication dates, and organizational transparency. This makes E-E-A-T not just a quality guideline but a practical optimization framework for AI visibility.
E
Experience
First-hand, real-world experience with the topic
E
Expertise
Demonstrated knowledge and credentials in the field
A
Authoritativeness
Recognized authority and organizational credibility
T
Trust
Accuracy, transparency, and safety to cite
Why AI Amplifies E-E-A-T Requirements
Traditional search engines rank pages based on signals that exist outside the page — backlinks from other sites, domain authority built over years, user behavior data. AI systems don’t work this way. When ChatGPT, Perplexity, or Google AI Overviews evaluates a page for potential citation, they primarily assess what’s on the page itself.
The AI reads the content, looks for author attribution, checks for source citations, and evaluates whether the claims are verifiable. This shift has three major implications:
No shortcuts
You can't substitute a strong backlink profile for weak on-page trust signals. AI systems don't check your domain authority — they check whether your page has a named author with verifiable credentials.
Every page evaluated independently
Your homepage might have excellent E-E-A-T signals, but if your pricing page has no author attribution and no dates, AI will treat that page as low-trust. Trust is evaluated at the page level, not the domain level.
Verification is literal
When AI looks for “expertise,” it’s literally checking whether the author has stated credentials. When it looks for “trust,” it’s checking whether claims have source citations. The signals need to be explicitly present in the page content.
The net result: E-E-A-T is no longer just a quality framework for human raters. It’s a practical checklist of signals that AI systems use to decide whether to cite your content.
How Each Letter Maps to AI Evaluation
Each component of E-E-A-T translates to specific, checkable signals that AI systems evaluate. Below is a deep dive into each letter.
Experience
1st-hand signalsDoes the content demonstrate first-hand, real-world experience with the topic?
How AI evaluates it
- Case studies with specific details — named companies, specific metrics, measurable outcomes.
- Screenshots and original data — references to original research, proprietary data, or first-party analysis.
- Personal narrative with verifiable context — “As a content strategist who has audited over 1,000 pages since 2023…”
- Product-specific knowledge — deep knowledge of features, limitations, and pricing tiers.
- • Generic advice with no personal context
- • "We believe" statements without evidence
- • Case studies with anonymized details (impossible to verify)
- • Content that reads like a summary of other articles
- • Add specific case studies with named companies (with permission)
- • Include original data from your own analysis
- • Reference specific situations you've encountered
- • Show before/after results with metrics
Expertise
CredentialsDoes the author have demonstrated expertise in the topic?
How AI evaluates it
- Author credentials — named author with relevant professional title, certifications, or education.
- Publication history — multiple articles on the same topic demonstrate depth. Person schema with linked author page helps.
- Topic depth — covers nuances, edge cases, and advanced aspects rather than staying at 101-level.
- Technical accuracy — AI cross-references factual claims against known information.
- • No author name at all (the most common expertise failure)
- • Author listed as "Team" or "Staff" (unverifiable)
- • Author bio that doesn't mention relevant credentials
- • Content that's broad but shallow — covering many topics without depth
- • Add named authors to all content
- • Create detailed author bio pages with credentials and professional history
- • Use Person schema markup for every author
- • Ensure content demonstrates genuine topic knowledge through specificity
Authoritativeness
Org credibilityIs this source recognized as an authority on this topic?
How AI evaluates it
- Consistent entity information — clear Organization schema with consistent company name and scope across pages.
- About page quality — company history, mission, team members, and contact information.
- Source citations from the content — citing authoritative sources signals a credible knowledge framework.
- Topical focus — a site that covers a narrow topic deeply signals more authority than a generalist site.
- • About page is a stub or missing entirely
- • No Organization schema
- • Site covers dozens of unrelated topics (diluted authority)
- • No contact information or physical address
- • Build a comprehensive About page with company details and methodology
- • Implement Organization schema with accurate information
- • Maintain topical focus — publish content within your area of expertise
- • Include proper contact information
Trust
FoundationIs this content accurate, transparent, and safe to cite? Trust is the foundational element — without it, the other three letters carry no weight.
How AI evaluates it
- Source citations for claims — every statistic, data point, or assertion should cite its source.
- Transparency about methodology — describe how you conducted your analysis or research.
- Publication and update dates — visible dates signal that content is maintained.
- Privacy policy and terms — standard trust pages signal legitimate operation.
- Hedging and accuracy — appropriately hedging uncertain claims increases trust.
- • Statistics without source attribution
- • Bold claims without evidence (“the best tool on the market”)
- • No publication dates
- • No privacy policy or terms
- • Exaggerated results without methodology
- • Add source citations to every statistical claim
- • Show publication and update dates on all content
- • Add appropriate hedging to uncertain claims
- • Publish privacy policy and terms of service
- • Be transparent about your methodology
YMYL and AI Risk
YMYL — Your Money or Your Life — refers to topics where inaccurate information could directly harm the reader. This includes health and medical information, financial advice, legal guidance, safety information, and important life decisions (housing, insurance, education).
AI systems apply a significantly higher E-E-A-T threshold to YMYL content. Here’s what changes:
Author credentials become mandatory
For health content, AI expects a medical professional. For financial content, a financial advisor or CPA. For legal content, a lawyer. “Staff writer” on a health article effectively disqualifies it.
Source requirements increase
YMYL content needs authoritative sources — peer-reviewed studies for health, regulatory documents for finance, case law for legal. General “industry sources” are insufficient.
Hedging becomes critical
“This supplement cures insomnia” won’t be cited because it’s unverifiable and potentially dangerous. “Clinical studies suggest that melatonin may help some adults with onset insomnia” is both more accurate and more citable.
Red team flags increase
AI actively scans YMYL content for harm: exaggerated efficacy claims, missing disclaimers, advice contradicting medical consensus. A single red-team flag can prevent citation.
Practical impact
If your content falls into YMYL categories, E-E-A-T optimization isn’t optional — it’s the primary factor determining whether AI will cite you. Invest heavily in author credentials, source citations, and appropriate hedging before optimizing any other dimension.
Practical E-E-A-T Audit Checklist
Score each item as Present (2), Partial (1), or Missing (0). A page scoring below 30/50 has significant E-E-A-T gaps.
Experience
10 pts maxExpertise
10 pts maxAuthoritativeness
10 pts maxTrust
10 pts maxYMYL (score only if applicable)
10 pts maxBuilding E-E-A-T Signals from Scratch
If you’re starting with a new site, a new brand, or content that currently has no E-E-A-T signals, here’s a practical roadmap for building trust from zero.
Foundation
- Create a detailed About page (company story, mission, what you do, who you serve)
- Add contact information (email, location if applicable)
- Publish privacy policy and terms of service
- Implement Organization schema
- Set up author profile pages for every content creator
Author Attribution
- Add named authors with credentials to every existing content page
- Create Person schema for each author
- Link from each article to the author’s bio page
- Ensure author bios include relevant professional experience
Source Citations
- Audit all existing content for uncited claims
- Add source citations to every statistic and factual claim
- Link to original sources when possible
- Remove or properly attribute any unverifiable claims
Content Quality
- Add publication dates and last-updated dates to all content
- Review first 50 words of every key page — ensure they define the topic
- Add case studies or specific examples based on real experience
- Implement Article schema with datePublished and dateModified
Maintenance
- Update key pages every 13 weeks
- Add new case studies as you accumulate experience
- Expand author bios as credentials grow
- Publish content consistently within your area of expertise
- Monitor E-E-A-T scores in audits and address any new gaps
Common mistake: Trying to build E-E-A-T through volume. Publishing 100 articles quickly doesn’t build expertise — publishing 10 deeply researched articles with proper attribution does. AI systems evaluate quality per page, not quantity per domain.
E-E-A-T Mistakes That Tank AI Visibility
These are the most common E-E-A-T mistakes — and each one can significantly reduce your AI citation rate.
Anonymous content
No author name, no byline, no attribution. AI systems treat anonymous content as unverifiable.
Fix: Add named authors to every content page.
Missing dates
No publication date, no update date. Content without dates could be from 2019 or 2026 — AI can’t tell.
Fix: Show both publication and last-updated dates on every content page.
Exaggerated claims
“The #1 solution,” “guaranteed results,” “revolutionary technology.” AI can’t verify superlatives, so it won’t cite them.
Fix: Replace with specific, measurable claims.
Uncited statistics
“80% of users prefer…” without any source. AI systems increasingly cross-reference statistics and flag unverifiable numbers.
Fix: Cite the source, year, and methodology for every statistic.
Stub About page
“We are a company that does things.” An About page without substance signals low organizational transparency.
Fix: Build a comprehensive About page with mission, team, methodology, and history.
Generic author bios
“John is a writer with a passion for technology.” This provides no verifiable expertise signal.
Fix: Include specific credentials, professional title, years of experience, and relevant publications.
YMYL content without credentials
Publishing health, financial, or legal content without appropriately credentialed authors. This is the highest-risk E-E-A-T failure.
Fix: Assign YMYL content to credentialed professionals.
Fake social proof
Testimonials from “Sarah M.” or reviews without verifiable details. AI can’t verify anonymous testimonials.
Fix: Use full names, roles, and company names (with permission).
No first-party experience
Content that summarizes other sources without adding original insight, data, or experience. AI prefers original content over aggregation.
Fix: Add original data, case studies, or first-hand analysis.
Inconsistent entity information
Your Organization schema says one thing, your About page says another, and your LinkedIn says a third. Inconsistency reduces AI confidence.
Fix: Ensure all entity information is consistent across your site and external profiles.
How TurboAudit Evaluates E-E-A-T
TurboAudit’s Trust & E-E-A-T branch (20% weight in the overall score) evaluates the following signals:
Checks performed
Scoring
Each check contributes to the branch score. Critical checks (author attribution, dates, About page) are weighted more heavily. YMYL pages receive additional checks for professional credentials and authoritative sources.
Why 20% weight?
Trust & E-E-A-T receives the second-highest weight in TurboAudit’s scoring because it’s the second most common reason pages fail to get AI citations (after Intent & Value). Pages that score well on Indexability and Schema but poorly on Trust are technically accessible but not trustworthy enough to cite.
Score interpretation
8.0+
Strong E-E-A-T
Page meets citation trust requirements. Strong signals across all letters.
5.0–7.9
Gaps Exist
Some signals present but gaps remain. Common gaps: missing dates, author without credentials, uncited statistics.
Below 5.0
Critical Gaps
AI systems are unlikely to cite this page until fundamental attribution and transparency issues are addressed.
Check your E-E-A-T score
TurboAudit evaluates all 13 E-E-A-T signals automatically and returns a scored report with prioritized fixes.
Audit your page free →Frequently Asked Questions
E-E-A-T stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trust. It is Google's framework for evaluating content quality, originally introduced as E-A-T and expanded in December 2022. In the context of AI search, E-E-A-T represents the verifiable trust signals that AI systems look for when deciding whether to cite a page.
E-E-A-T is not a direct ranking algorithm or score. It is a set of qualitative criteria used by Google's human quality raters. However, Google's ranking systems are designed to surface content that demonstrates these qualities. For AI search specifically, E-E-A-T signals are directly evaluated by AI systems when deciding whether content is trustworthy enough to cite.
Traditional search engines use external signals (backlinks, domain authority) as trust proxies. AI systems evaluate trust by reading the page itself — they look for author credentials, source citations, publication dates, and organizational transparency directly in the content. This means E-E-A-T signals must be explicitly present on the page, not inferred from domain reputation.
Author attribution is the single most impactful E-E-A-T signal. A named author with relevant credentials increases AI citation likelihood by an estimated 40-60% for informational content. Anonymous content (no author, or author listed as 'Team' or 'Admin') is treated as unverifiable by AI systems.
YMYL stands for Your Money or Your Life. It refers to content topics where inaccurate information could directly harm the reader — including health and medical information, financial advice, legal guidance, safety information, and important life decisions. AI systems apply significantly higher E-E-A-T requirements to YMYL content, including mandatory professional credentials for authors.
Start with foundation signals: a detailed About page, contact information, privacy policy, and Organization schema (Week 1). Then add named authors with credentials and Person schema to all content (Week 2). Add source citations to every factual claim (Week 3). Finally, add dates, case studies, and Article schema (Week 4). Focus on quality over quantity — 10 deeply researched articles build more trust than 100 shallow ones.
Backlinks matter less for AI visibility than for traditional SEO. AI systems primarily evaluate trust by reading the page itself, not by counting external links. However, backlinks can indirectly help by increasing your page's presence in AI retrieval sets (since retrieval often relies on traditional search indexes). The key difference: you can't substitute backlinks for on-page E-E-A-T signals.
Yes, but it's significantly less likely, especially for informational and YMYL content. Anonymous content may be cited for purely factual or technical content (like documentation) where the information is easily verifiable against other sources. For opinion, analysis, advice, or YMYL topics, anonymous content is treated as unverifiable and rarely cited.
Deep-dive guides in this series
Audit Your AI Search Visibility
See exactly how AI systems view your content and what to fix. Join the waitlist to get early access.
Audit Your AI Search Visibility
See exactly how AI systems view your content and what to fix. Join the waitlist to get early access.
Related Articles
Continue exploring this topic with these in-depth guides.
Author Bios That Build AI Trust
How to write author bios that AI systems can verify and use as trust signals.
Read article2Social Proof Signals AI Can Verify
Which social proof signals AI actually checks — and which are invisible to machines.
Read article3YMYL Pages and AI: The Higher Standard
AI is extra cautious with health, finance, and legal content. Learn the higher E-E-A-T bar for YMYL pages.
Read article4Building Site Authority for AI from Zero
New site, no backlinks, no brand recognition. Here's how to build authority signals AI can verify.
Read article5Trust Signals Checklist for Any Website
A comprehensive checklist of trust signals every website should implement for AI credibility.
Read article6Trust & E-E-A-T Signals: What AI Systems Verify
Author attribution, about pages, contact information, external citations, and experience signals — the trust infrastructure AI systems check before citing your content.
Read article