Perplexity's citations teardown

What works

• Chips show publisher domain first, users recognize ESPN vs FanDuel before clicking.
• +N communicates multiple sources for one claim without cluttering the sentence.
• Chips sit inline so skeptical readers spot sourcing while scanning bullets.

What we would push on

• Domain abbreviations (sportsbook.fanduel) may confuse non-US users. Tooltip with full title helps.

Takeaway

Use publisher-first inline chips with a count, not footnotes at the bottom of the page.

What works

• Research steps make retrieval visible, users see the system looked before asserting favorites.
• Expand/collapse keeps auditors happy without wall-of-log noise for casual readers.
• Step wording mirrors user mental model (Checking predictions) not API names.

What we would push on

• Steps do not list domains fetched, auditors still jump to Links or chips for specifics.

Takeaway

Trust starts with showing retrieval happened. Then show which sources matter.

What works

• One glance shows how many sources backed the answer and which domains dominated.
• Sources row lives in the action bar, same elevation as copy and share, not footer debris.
• Count sets expectation before users open the full Links tab.

What we would push on

• Favicon stack truncates; users cannot see all ten without clicking through.

Takeaway

Summarize source breadth on the answer chrome, inline chips for local, row for global.

What works

• Links tab is a dedicated audit view, same query, every reference as a scannable card.
• Each card shows title, URL, snippet, and preview image before opening a new tab.
• Tab sits beside Answer and Images so audit does not require leaving the result.

What we would push on

• Users must discover the Links tab, no inline jump from a chip number to card N in list.

Takeaway

Offer a full source browser as a peer tab, not only hover cards on chips.

What works

• Wrong sources separates citation failures from generic Inaccurate, routes triage correctly.
• Sits beside Out of date for stale odds/news, common on time-sensitive search.
• Optional chips keep the modal lightweight.

What we would push on

• No follow-up to mark which source was wrong, product learns less than per-citation flagging.

Takeaway

Search products need source-specific negative feedback, not only “bad answer.”

What works

• Users can challenge one paragraph , “Why this is still uncertain” , without re-running the whole query.
• Check sources pairs with Add to follow-up: verify vs iterate on the same selection.
• Selection stays highlighted until the user acts.

What we would push on

• Discoverability is select-first only. Skeptical users may never find Check sources.

Takeaway

Let users audit a claim span directly, trust UX is local, not page-level only.

What works

• Sources sidebar keeps the answer visible while users audit references, no full-page tab switch.
• Each card repeats favicon, domain, title, and snippet, same shape as Links tab, faster to reach from the action bar.
• Panel header shows total count (10 sources) with a close control to return to reading.

What we would push on

• Sidebar narrows the answer column on smaller viewports, verify mobile falls back to full-width sheet.

Takeaway

Offer a one-click sources panel beside the answer, not only a separate Links tab.

What works

• Chip click surfaces source detail in place, favicon, domain, headline, and excerpt before opening a new tab.
• 1/2 navigation when a claim cites multiple sources (+1), users browse stacked evidence without the full sidebar.
• Popover anchors to the chip so the connection between claim and source stays obvious.

What we would push on

• Popover competes with sidebar and Links tab, three paths to sources may confuse first-time users.

Takeaway

Let inline chips expand into quick-verify popovers with pagination when +N > 0.

Perplexity layers trust: domain chips on claims → research steps → sources summary row → chip popovers → sources sidebar → Links tab audit → Check sources on selections → Wrong sources in feedback.

Output teardown covers tabs, follow-ups, export, and rewrite. This guide is the evidence stack those answers sit on.

Steal the layered model if your product makes factual claims: inline chips, summary row, popover verify, sidebar or tab for depth.