---

name: social-proof-evidence description: Use when selecting, writing, or auditing testimonials, reviews, ratings, case studies, usage stats, customer logos, waitlists, community signals, popularity claims, marketplace rankings, group-norm messages, or any proof that relies on what other people do or believe. license: MIT metadata: version: "0.1.0" displayName: Social Proof Evidence category: Marketing tags: influence,persuasion,social-proof,evidence

Social Proof Evidence

Use social proof as evidence, not theater. The principle works because people infer appropriate action from others, especially under uncertainty, but the evidence must be real and relevant.

Quick Start

1. Read guidelines.md to choose the smallest useful reference set.
2. Load references/social-proof/knowledge.md for concepts and references/social-proof/rules.md for operating rules.
3. Use workflows/choose-social-proof.md for repeatable tasks.
4. For audits, surface both the active influence cue and the ethical rewrite.

Contents

File	Purpose
references/social-proof/knowledge.md	Core concepts and source-grounded definitions
references/social-proof/rules.md	Rules, boundaries, and practical guidelines
references/social-proof/examples.md	Bad/better examples for applied situations
references/social-proof/smells.md	Red flags and anti-patterns to detect
references/social-proof/checklist.md	Fast review checklist
workflows/choose-social-proof.md	Select and present proof that is truthful, relevant, and not staged.

Operating Principles

• Use only honest evidence. Do not invent popularity, scarcity, credentials, endorsements, or social connection.
• Separate helping a good decision from pushing a shortcut response. If the cue is counterfeit, treat it as a red flag.
• When rewriting, preserve user agency: add context, alternatives, and enough time to decide when stakes are meaningful.

Output Pattern

1. Diagnosis - name the influence principle or cue.
2. Evidence Check - state what proof supports or is missing from the cue.
3. Risk - explain manipulation, trust, or decision-quality risk.
4. Rewrite or Recommendation - provide an ethical alternative.

Validation

Use the prompts in evals/evals.json as smoke tests. A good result identifies the relevant Influence principle, preserves user agency, and avoids fabricated evidence or coercive pressure.