Build a research source table you can actually check

Separate questions, claims, sources and uncertainty in a small research table, with a fictional example and a source-checking exercise.

A useful task, worked through.

Research becomes easier to use when you can trace a sentence back to the material that supports it. A source table gives AI a useful organizing job without letting it decide what is true by how often a claim appears. Start with three sources and one question, then inspect the links before writing the narrative.

Ask a question small enough for the evidence

Our fictional question is: “Why did a town library change its evening opening hours?” The practice packet contains a council minute approving a three-month trial, a library notice announcing the new hours and an interview in which one student says the change is helpful. These are invented source descriptions for learning the method.

A council decision, an operational notice and a person’s opinion answer different questions. The interview cannot establish how all students feel. The notice may say what changed without explaining the decision. Write those distinctions down before asking the assistant to produce a persuasive account.

Give each row a claim and a location

Use columns for the question, proposed claim, source title, publication date, exact location and limitation. An authored row might read: “Was the change permanent? A three-month trial was approved; council minute; fictional date; item 4; the packet does not include a later decision.” This row preserves the difference between a trial and a permanent service.

For real work, use a page number, section heading or stable document identifier. A homepage link is rarely enough to revisit a particular claim. If the assistant cannot open the document, mark the row as unverified and do not substitute a plausible quotation. Check access rights before uploading material.

A request you can adapt

Build a source table from these permitted documents. For every proposed claim, give the supporting passage location and the source limitation. Separate recorded facts from interpretations. If a document is unavailable or does not support a claim, say so. Do not invent quotes or fill missing dates.

Keep conflicting claims separate

Suppose the interview calls the longer hours “permanent,” while the council minute says “trial.” The table should show both statements with their different authority and dates. Ask whether a later council decision could explain the discrepancy. Until that evidence appears, the strongest supported description is the one that acknowledges the unresolved status.

Do not count three copies of the same news release as three independent confirmations. Follow the chain back to the original document where possible. A summary can help you discover a source, but the claim in your paper needs support from material you have actually inspected.

Write only what the rows can carry

An authored synthesis is: “The supplied council minute authorizes a three-month evening-hours trial. The library notice describes the revised schedule. One interviewee welcomed the change, but this packet does not establish overall demand or whether the trial became permanent.” The wording is less sweeping because the evidence is limited.

Try adding a new fictional source: an attendance sheet with no explanation of how visits were counted. Write one claim it could support and two it could not. Then draft a paragraph using only verified rows. Keep unresolved questions at the end so your next research session begins with a precise search rather than another broad prompt.

Turn a checked collection into a research project

Take it further with a changed example

If several rows seem to support the same claim, check whether they repeat one original source. Three summaries of the same report are not three independent observations. Add an “original source” field when that relationship matters and keep secondary commentary identifiable.

Try a claim audit: choose one sentence from your draft and trace it backward through the table to the exact passage. If the passage supports only part of the sentence, narrow the sentence or find the missing evidence. Do not solve the gap by adding another unspecific link.

For a further exercise, introduce a source that disagrees with one row. Record the disagreement before explaining it. Differences in date, definitions or population may account for it, but treat those explanations as possibilities until you inspect the relevant material.

Take this into your next task

Keep the passage location and the limitation beside the claim before you write the polished paragraph.

Build your learning roadmap.

Questions people ask

Is a source table a bibliography?

It connects specific claims to evidence. A bibliography lists the works you used; you may need both.

What if several sites repeat the same fact?

Check whether they depend on a single original. Repetition does not create independent evidence.

Should I delete uncertain rows?

Keep them clearly marked as unresolved leads, separate from claims you are ready to use.

What should I do when a source disappears?

Record that you cannot currently reopen it and look for an appropriate archived or alternate original copy. Do not present an inaccessible citation as newly verified.

Sources and editorial notes

Reviewed 2026-09-07. Product capabilities depend on the app, plan, region and workspace settings. Workflows and prompts are authored teaching material, not recorded model results or measured time-saving claims.

Keep going

Related Power of AI pages

Keep reading with Start here, everyday uses, the tool guide, the writing workshop, and sources and standards.