The reference desk
Follow the source.
An idea should travel with its evidence — and the limits of that evidence.
Reference 01 / Aubin Le Quéré & Matias · Scientific Reports
When curiosity gaps backfire: effects of headline concreteness on information selection decisions (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- 2025
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Research on headline concreteness and information selection using online headline tests. Random assignment concerns complete headline alternatives, not an independently manipulated word attribute.
Access & interpretation limits
Editorial review uses the approved research references; the publisher page was not re-retrieved on the review date. Do not treat a headline-feature association as an isolated causal effect or extrapolate it to every platform.
Reference 02 / Prowten et al. · Psychological Science
Does Physiological Arousal Increase Social Transmission of Information? (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- 2024
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Two preregistered replication studies did not detect the proposed effect of exercise-induced incidental arousal on reported willingness to share news. The outcome was sharing willingness, not observed sharing on a social platform.
Access & interpretation limits
Editorial review uses the approved research references; no fresh full-text retrieval. Null findings constrain a general claim that arousal increases sharing; they are not a blanket disproof of every emotional effect, medium or population.
Used in
ArousalReference 03 / Brady et al. · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- 2017
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Observational analysis of moral-emotional language and diffusion in political Twitter discussions. Network and topic context matter; the study is not an experiment assigning language to people.
Access & interpretation limits
Editorial review uses the approved research references; no fresh full-text retrieval. Associations do not establish a causal wording effect or transfer to nonpolitical content. Included for media literacy, not targeted political persuasion.
Used in
Moral-emotional diffusionReference 04 / Robertson et al. · Nature Human Behaviour
Negativity drives online news consumption (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- 2023
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Headline-test data from Upworthy and analysis of negative language in relation to click-through. Readers were randomly assigned whole headline alternatives in that publisher's testing environment.
Access & interpretation limits
Editorial review uses the approved research references; no fresh full-text retrieval. Random assignment of headlines does not independently isolate negative words from other headline differences. Click-through is not trust, satisfaction, learning or sales.
Reference 06 / Verhallen & Robben · Journal of Economic Psychology
Scarcity and preference: An experiment on unavailability and product evaluation (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- 1994
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
A small, older experiment on availability explanations and product evaluation. The reason an item is unavailable matters to interpreting scarcity.
Access & interpretation limits
Editorial review uses the approved research references; no fresh full-text retrieval. The study is not a modern ecommerce field trial, does not establish a universal sales lift and does not validate fake timers or invented stock counts.
Reference 07 / Meta
Instagram Feed ranking — historical system card (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- 2022
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Historical 2022 disclosure of Instagram Feed candidate selection, predictions and ranking. The scope is Feed, not Reels, Explore or all of Instagram.
Access & interpretation limits
Historical reference, not a freshly verified 2026 specification. The URL may now present a changed document. No current signal weights, complete model, or outcome guarantee are established by this record.
Used in
Instagram FeedReference 08 / TikTok Help Center
How TikTok recommends content (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- Date not established
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Official help-index information about recommendations, including For You and Search. These are separate surfaces, not one interchangeable algorithm.
Access & interpretation limits
Official index only: direct access to the article body was restricted during the approved research. Broad signal families are recorded conservatively; exact wording, current weights and a complete surface-specific pipeline were not verified. No new retrieval was performed on the editorial review date.
Reference 09 / YouTube Help
Search and discovery tips — Shorts (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- Date not established
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Official explanation of Shorts discovery, viewer personalization, choosing to view, retention and satisfaction-related signals; topic interest, competition and seasonality also affect exposure.
Access & interpretation limits
Living help document; publication date and model weights are not supplied here. Reviewed against the approved research reference, not freshly fetched. The disclosure is directional guidance, not a deterministic reach formula.
Used in
YouTube ShortsReference 10 / YouTube Help
How YouTube recommendations work (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- Date not established
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Official overview of recommendation signals and differences between surfaces. Home relies primarily on watch history; recommendations also use feedback and satisfaction information rather than watch time alone.
Access & interpretation limits
Living help document; publication date and exact weights are unknown here. Reviewed against the approved reference, not freshly fetched. Home guidance must not be substituted for Shorts or search ranking.
Used in
YouTube HomeReference 11 / Google Search Central
Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- Date not established
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Guidance for assessing useful, reliable content made for people, including original information, clear sourcing and a satisfying answer. Not a checklist of directly measurable ranking weights.
Access & interpretation limits
Living documentation reviewed through the approved reference, not newly retrieved. The guidance does not reveal a complete retrieval or ranking algorithm, keyword volumes, or guaranteed positions. E-E-A-T is not a single ranking factor.
Used in
Google SearchReference 12 / Google Search Central
What is URL canonicalization (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- Date not established
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
How Google identifies a representative URL among duplicate or very similar pages. Canonicalization concerns indexing and consolidation, not emotional appeal.
Access & interpretation limits
Living documentation reviewed through the approved reference, not newly retrieved. A declared canonical is a signal, not a guarantee of Google's selected canonical or of indexing and ranking.
Used in
Google SearchReference 13 / Google Trends Help
FAQ about Google Trends data (opens in a new tab)
- Published
- Date not established
- Editorial review
- 2026-09-08
Google Trends uses sampled search data and normalized relative interest. Values from 0 to 100 depend on the chosen comparison, geography, time range and search type; they are not absolute search volumes.
Access & interpretation limits
Living help document reviewed through the approved reference, not newly retrieved. Independently normalized exports are not automatically comparable, a zero may reflect insufficient data, and a spike does not identify its cause. This app does not fetch live Trends data.
Used in
Trend notebook
A separate register from the checker.
The older checker uses reference labels attached to detector categories. Those labels are not this claim-level catalogue and should not be read as evidence that a phrase proves manipulation, identifies an emotion or predicts an outcome.
Read the checker boundary