Reviewed as of 27 September 2026.
AI assistants are useful for starting a literature search and dangerous for finishing one. They may give you an article that does not exist, a fabricated page reference, a sentence the author never wrote or a link that leads to a different source. There is no need to attribute intent to them: they generate plausible answers, and a plausible reference is not necessarily a real one. This guide sets out a five-step check, from the quickest to the decisive one.
What can go wrong
These are the most common errors I have come across:
- complete references to works that do not exist, built from plausible authors, journals and titles;
- real works with errors in the year, publisher, volume, pages or order of authors;
- sentences attributed to an author that actually come from the back cover, an editorial note or a review;
- data attributed to an institution whose link actually leads to a different source;
- summaries that credit the text with a thesis it does not hold;
- direct quotations that combine different passages or translate loosely without saying so.
Step 1: check that it exists
Look for the reference outside the assistant. For an article, try the exact title and the author's name in your library catalogue, a suitable bibliographic database or Google Scholar. If it has a DOI, resolve it through https://doi.org/ and also look up its metadata with the relevant registration agency, such as Crossref for many academic books and journals.
A DOI that temporarily fails to lead to the article may reflect an outdated link or a problem at the publisher, not only a false identifier. Conversely, a DOI that resolves does not prove that the cited details are correct: check that the title, author and publication match. If the identifier leads to a different work, the reference is wrong.
For a book, check the catalogue of a national, university or union library. If it does not appear, do not immediately conclude that it does not exist. Treat it as unverified until you find a reliable record or the book itself.
Step 2: compare the data
Check them one by one:
- authors and order of authorship;
- title and subtitle;
- year and version;
- journal, publisher or repository;
- volume, issue, pages or article number;
- DOI, ISBN or other identifier;
- language and edition consulted.
Do not copy a formatted reference without checking where its metadata come from. Catalogues can also contain errors or incomplete records. Where there are discrepancies, compare the document, the publisher's page and the registration agency.
Step 3: verify the link and authority
Open every link. Check:
- who actually publishes the page;
- whether it is the original source or an intermediary;
- whether it contains the information attributed to it;
- whether it corresponds to the edition and date cited;
- whether it links to an earlier document closer to the event.
A museum page may link to an encyclopaedia; a news story may summarise a press release; a repository may host a copy without being responsible for the content. The information may be correct, but the description of the source must be accurate.
Step 4: check that the text actually says it
This is the decisive step for a direct quotation and for attributing a thesis to an author. Open the text, find the passage, read it in context and note the page or a stable locator. If you are working with a digital edition without fixed pagination, record the chapter, heading, paragraph, section number or location.
Also check:
- that no words that could change the meaning have been left out;
- that the translation is faithful and marked as your own where appropriate;
- that the quotation does not merge separate passages;
- that the author puts forward the idea as their own thesis and not in order to discuss or reject it;
- that the version consulted matches the one cited.
If the sentence does not appear, do not present it as a direct quotation. If you have only found an equivalent wording, paraphrase it accurately and cite the actual passage.
Be especially wary of sentences that fit your argument perfectly. Neat, promotional wording is common on back covers and in blurbs. It may summarise a work, but it should not be attributed to the author without checking.
Step 5: classify the source
Before using it, identify what you have before you:
- consulted text, which lets you check a quotation or a thesis;
- institutional, legal or archival source, primary for the fact it documents;
- bibliographic record, useful for identifying a publication, not for stating what it argues;
- promotional or commercial description, useful as a lead, not as a substitute for the text.
The category depends on the claim. An official decision is a primary source for the act it contains, even if it is secondary with regard to the historical events it recounts.
How to ask the assistant
A useful request would be:
For each claim, give the original source, the exact passage, the page or locator, the edition consulted and the DOI or persistent URL. Distinguish between full text, abstract, metadata, institutional source and promotional material. State explicitly what you have not been able to check and do not fill in missing details by inference.
This does not replace checking. It only forces the uncertainty into view.
Keep a verification record
For long pieces of work, keep the following for each citation:
- complete reference;
- link or file consulted;
- edition and version;
- page or locator;
- original passage;
- translation used, if any;
- date accessed;
- a short note on what the source proves and what it does not.
The record lets you repeat the check if a link changes and stops a paraphrase from turning into a direct quotation over successive drafts.
Three errors to avoid
- Do not use the assistant's response as a substitute for the original source when it can be consulted.
- Do not accept a reference just because every field is filled in or its DOI looks valid.
- Do not turn 'I have not found it' into 'it does not exist'. Describe the scope of your search and write 'not located' or 'not verified' when that is what you actually know.
Final checklist
- Does the work exist and is it identified in a reliable register?
- Do the metadata match the document?
- Does the link belong to whoever you say and does it contain the information?
- Have you read the complete passage in the cited edition?
- Are the page or locator correct?
- Is the quotation verbatim and is the translation identified?
- Is the source suitable for the claim you are making?
- Have you flagged what you could not verify?
On the open conversation
This guide sets out the method I use to verify references obtained with the help of AI assistants. It complements 'Primary source or back cover' and 'How to declare AI use in academic work'. If you teach research methods, work in a university library or have spotted other errors, the guide remains open.
Sources
- DOI Foundation, DOI Handbook.
- Crossref Metadata Search.
- My own method for the verification procedure.