Numerator
The number of observations satisfying the stated condition.
Methodology
Reputation depends on context. Read the sources, observation period and sample limitations before interpreting a result.
What you get
Choose the brand, product or service, market, language, sources and observation period. Confirm that each observation concerns the correct entity. Competitor comparison requires the same scope and comparable coverage; a familiar name is not enough.
| Perspective | Object observed | Basis for interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Conversations and sentiment | Content attributed to your brand and judgements expressed on topics. | Relevant corpus, duplicates, reviews and unclassified share. |
| Search | Results collected for a defined query set. | Engine, context and eligible runs; position distinct from frequency of presence. |
| AI answers | Descriptions, mentions, citations and suggestions in sampled answers. | Questions, model and version; incomplete outcomes and refusals remain identifiable. |
What you get
Measurement starts with the counted unit: content, mention or documented experience. The method should record confirmed attributions, exclusions and duplicate groups so a review can reconstruct why one item enters the total and another does not.
What you get
The distribution uses items classified under the same criteria version as its denominator. The report displays unclassified items separately and retains any mixed outcomes. A classification change needs an identifiable version before two periods are compared.
What you get
Search coverage uses complete, eligible observations as its denominator; average position uses only those with confirmed presence. The method retains engine, query, market and device to prevent a denominator change from being interpreted as domain movement.
What you get
For each AI indicator, the method states the observed event and valid denominator: brand mention, recommendation or source reference. All three may coexist. Review preserves the answer and collection conditions needed to verify each attribution.
Origin and meaning
TrustInsider connects different observations while preserving their origin. An article describes a public narrative; an organic result shows a page encountered in a search; an AI answer shows what a system generated under recorded conditions.
These perspectives may help reconstruct the same topic, but they do not share a measurement unit. The method separates conversations, searches, answers and authorised property data. Connections between evidence must be verifiable: the same topic appearing twice does not prove that one item caused another observation.
| Origin | What it describes | What it does not prove |
|---|---|---|
| Press, web and conversations | Relevant content available through authorised sources. | Every customer’s opinion or the entire market conversation. |
| Google or Bing organic search | Results observed for a query, market, device and time. | Visits, conversions or visibility on other engines. |
| Sampled AI answer | Mention, recommendation and citation in the collected answer. | How many people saw that answer or a universal position. |
| Customer property | Measures exposed by connected systems with the owner’s consent. | Unmeasured journeys or certain attribution of visits without an identifiable source. |
From collection to measurement
Every indicator should be traceable to what was counted. Period, market, language, sources, inclusion criteria and exclusions define the result’s meaning.
In AI sampling, rates include complete, reviewed answers; errors, refusals and unreviewed answers remain separate. In organic search, presence refers to complete results, while average position considers only searches where the brand appears. An empty base does not produce a reputation score of zero. TrustInsider’s calculations are deterministic and versioned; the model can help interpret them without inventing the value to display.
The number of observations satisfying the stated condition.
The eligible set over which that condition is measured.
Planned collections, available outcomes and limitations that qualify the result.
Interpretation and review
The result helps select a check or action. Moving from measurement to decision should make evidence, hypotheses and alternative explanations explicit.
A proposal may concern an incomplete page, inaccurate description or recurring experience problem. Your team examines the current version before approving the plan. A source, panel or method change should accompany the comparison; the subsequent outcome remains distinct from proof of work completed. Comparison describes what changed in available sources and keeps hypotheses about causes separate.
Related paths
Check your brand’s presence, compare results or choose content improvements: continue with the feature you need.
Dimensions of perceived trust, evidence and limitations: what a sample can describe and why it is not a financial assessment.
ReadPrompts, models, languages and dates in AI answer sampling: conditions for comparing observations without generalising them.
ReadTechnical availability and data usage rights: attribution, retention, excerpts and authorisations in reputation analysis.
ReadSee how the TrustInsider index is calculated: five channels, explicit weights, data coverage and comparisons over time.
Read