Acclaira

Chapter Nine · Lever Five

Evidence beats adjectives

This is the most replicated finding in the field, and the only one that comes from a controlled experiment rather than a correlation. Content that cites, quotes and quantifies gets pulled into answers substantially more often than content that asserts.

Chapter 9 of 26 · 3 min read

The analogy

Two suppliers pitch you. The first says they are reliable, experienced and committed to excellence. The second says they handled 4,200 containers last year, that their average clearance took 1.8 days, and quotes their largest customer by name saying so.

You did not verify either. You believe the second one anyway, because specificity is expensive to fake and vagueness is free. A language model runs the same instinct, for the same reason: it was trained on text written by people who apply it constantly.

The experiment

The 2024 paper that named this field — GEO: Generative Engine Optimization, presented at KDD 2024 — is the closest thing to a controlled trial we have. The authors built GEO-BENCH, a benchmark of 10,000 queries drawn from nine sources including MS MARCO, Natural Questions, ORCAS and real Perplexity queries, then rewrote source content nine different ways and measured which versions got pulled into generated answers more often. TIER A

Rewriting methodVisibility changeWhat it means
Add quotations+40.5%Quote a named, credible person
Add statistics+32.3%Replace qualitative claims with numbers
Improve fluency+28.7%Make the writing flow properly
Cite sources+27.6%Reference credible external sources
Authoritative tonevariesConfident, declarative writing — best in debate and history topics
Easy-to-understandmodest gainSimplify language, keep the information
Technical termsmodest / mixedAdd domain-specific vocabulary
Unique wordsmodest / mixedRarer vocabulary
Keyword stuffing−9.1%The classic SEO move. It actively hurts.

Aggarwal, Murahari, Rajpurohit, Kalyan, Narasimhan & Deshpande, "GEO: Generative Engine Optimization", KDD 2024. Figures shown are on the Position-Adjusted Word Count metric; the paper also reports a Subjective Impression metric where Statistics (+29.8%) and Quotations (+27.8%) again lead. Headline finding: up to 40% visibility improvement.

Three things in that table deserve to be read twice.

Keyword stuffing produced a negative result. The single most instinctive SEO reflex — say the target phrase more often — made content less likely to be used. If you take one thing from this chapter into a conversation with an agency, take that.

Fluency scored as highly as citation. Simply making the writing good was worth roughly as much as adding sources. This is not usually how optimisation works, and it is a reassuring signal about where the systems are pointed.

The effect was strongest for the underdog. Sites ranked lower in results gained far more than sites at the top. Adding source citations lifted a fifth-ranked site's visibility by 115.1% in the paper's measurement. If you are not the biggest name in your category, this is your chapter.

Two honest limits on this study

It was published in 2024 and tested against the generative engines of that moment; the systems have changed. And its visibility metrics are proxies, constructed by the authors, not revenue. Treat the ranking of methods as durable and the exact percentages as a snapshot. The ranking has been broadly corroborated by every vendor study since, which is why I rate it Tier A while still telling you not to quote "+40.5%" as though it were a law of physics.

What this looks like on a real page

"We have extensive experience handling hazardous goods and a strong track record with the authorities."

"In 2025 we filed 3,928 import declarations covering 10,400 containers at Port Klang, for 56 customer groups. Roughly two-thirds of those containers were 20ft."
One sentence became four verifiable statistics. None of them is a claim about how good the company is — which is precisely why they carry weight. Every figure here comes from DNE's operational records; see the method note in Chapter 10.

The four moves, in order of return

  • Quote someone real and name them. Your operations manager, a customer, a regulator's published statement, an industry body. A name and a role attached to a sentence changes its status.
  • Turn every adjective into a number. "High volume" is nothing. "10,400 containers across 3,928 declarations in 2025" is a fact. Go through your site and hunt adjectives.
  • Cite the source of every external claim. Link to the regulation, the study, the official figure. It costs a sentence.
  • Then edit for fluency. Read it aloud. Fix what makes you stumble. This scored as highly as the clever techniques.
How to check

Take any page and count two things: the number of specific figures, and the number of external citations. Most business pages score zero and zero. Set a floor — say three figures and two citations per substantial page — and work through your site against it.

If you only do one thing

Go through your five most important pages and replace every unsupported superlative with a number you can defend. If you cannot defend a number, delete the claim rather than softening it.

Read the whole book

Answering Machines is 26 chapters on being the answer when your customer stops searching and starts asking. Free, ungated, and every figure is sourced and confidence-rated.