How Google Actually Evaluates Your Content: The E-E-A-T Process Explained

There Are Humans Behind the Algorithm

Here's something most content creators don't know: Google employs thousands of people called "Search Quality Raters" whose job is to evaluate whether search results are actually good.

These aren't engineers tweaking code. They're real people looking at real search results and asking: is this helpful? Is this trustworthy? Does this answer the question?

Google publishes guidelines telling these raters exactly what to look for. The document runs over 170 pages and gets updated regularly. E-E-A-T is the core framework raters use to evaluate content quality.

Understanding how raters evaluate content means understanding what Google considers "quality" at a fundamental level.

Rater Evaluations Don't Directly Rank Pages

This is important: when a quality rater marks your page as low quality, it doesn't directly push your page down in rankings. No single rating affects any specific page's position.

Instead, rater evaluations serve as training data. Google uses thousands of these human assessments to measure whether their algorithms are working correctly.

If raters consistently mark certain types of pages as low quality but those pages rank highly, Google knows their algorithm needs adjustment.

Think of it like grading a test. The raters grade what Google's algorithm produced. Google then uses those grades to improve the algorithm itself. Your page doesn't get demoted because a rater said so. Your page gets demoted because it matches patterns that raters consistently identified as low quality.

The Three Things Raters Check

When evaluating your content, raters look at three distinct information sources.

What you say about yourself.

Raters start with your About page, author bios, and any credentials you display. This is your chance to establish who you are and why you're qualified to create this content. But raters know this information might be biased or exaggerated.

What others say about you.

Raters search for independent information about your website and content creators. They look for reviews, news articles, Wikipedia entries, expert recommendations, and other third-party sources. When there's disagreement between what you claim and what independent sources say, raters trust the independent sources.

What's visible on the page itself.

Raters examine the actual content. Does it demonstrate real expertise? Can you tell from watching a video that someone knows what they're doing? Do comments from users confirm or contradict the creator's claimed expertise?

This three-part check explains why self-proclaimed expertise isn't enough. Google's system is designed to verify claims through external validation and visible evidence.

Trust Sits at the Center

Google's guidelines literally place Trust at the center of the E-E-A-T framework, with Experience, Expertise, and Authoritativeness supporting it.

The reason is simple: a page can appear experienced, expert, and authoritative while still being untrustworthy. Google's guidelines use the example of a financial scammer. Someone running scams might be highly experienced at scamming, expert in manipulation techniques, and even recognized as authoritative among other scammers. None of that makes their content trustworthy.

This is why Trust overrides everything else. If raters determine a page is fundamentally untrustworthy, no amount of expertise or experience saves it.

Trust requirements scale with risk. An online store needs secure payments and reliable customer service. A medical website needs accurate, well-sourced information that won't harm people. A humor blog needs far less formal trust verification because the stakes are lower.

When Experience Matters More Than Expertise

Google added Experience to the framework in late 2022, recognizing that credentials aren't everything.
The guidelines specifically address why: people facing difficult life situations often want to hear from others who've been through it, not just experts giving clinical advice.

Someone going through cancer treatment might find more value in a forum post from another patient describing how they coped than in a medical textbook explanation. A person dealing with grief might connect more with someone who's experienced loss than with a therapist's theoretical framework.

Google's guidelines distinguish between content that needs expert credentials and content where lived experience provides unique value. Medical dosage information should come from healthcare professionals. The emotional experience of living with a chronic condition can come from patients.

This distinction matters for content creators. Sometimes your personal experience is your strongest qualification.

YMYL: When Standards Get Stricter

Google applies higher E-E-A-T standards to topics where bad information could seriously harm someone. They call these YMYL topics, meaning "Your Money or Your Life."

YMYL includes health and medical information, financial advice, legal matters, safety information, and news about major civic issues. Content on these topics faces more scrutiny because the consequences of misinformation are severe.

If you're writing about how to choose hiking boots, moderate E-E-A-T signals are probably fine. If you're writing about medication interactions or investment strategies, raters expect much stronger evidence of expertise and trustworthiness.

This explains why some topics are harder to rank for than others. It's not just competition. It's that Google intentionally raises the quality bar for content that could cause harm.

Conflict of Interest Matters

The guidelines specifically warn raters to watch for conflicts of interest. Product reviews from people who actually used the product are valuable. Reviews from the manufacturer or paid influencers are not trustworthy in the same way.

This affects how raters evaluate any content where the creator benefits from a particular conclusion. Affiliate content, sponsored posts, and company blogs all trigger extra scrutiny. The content might still be good, but raters know to verify claims rather than accept them at face value.

What This Means for Your Content

Google has built a system designed to verify, not just accept, what content creators claim.

Your About page matters, but it's just the starting point. Raters will search for independent confirmation. They'll look at what others say about you. They'll examine whether your content itself demonstrates the expertise you claim.

This is why genuine expertise, real experience, and actual trustworthiness matter more than impressive-sounding credentials. Google's evaluation process is specifically designed to see through surface-level signals to assess whether content truly deserves to rank.

FAQ

Do quality raters work for Google directly?

Quality raters are typically contractors who work for companies that partner with Google. They follow Google's published guidelines and complete rating tasks, but they don't have access to Google's internal ranking systems or algorithms.

How often does Google update the Quality Rater Guidelines?

Google updates the guidelines periodically, typically several times per year. Major updates are often announced, but smaller revisions happen more quietly. The current version referenced here is from September 2025.

Can I see my own quality rating?

No. Google doesn't share individual page ratings with website owners. The ratings are used internally to evaluate and improve Google's algorithms, not to provide feedback to content creators.

Does E-E-A-T apply to AI search too?

Yes. AI search tools like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews face similar challenges in determining which sources to trust. The same signals that demonstrate E-E-A-T to Google's raters help AI systems identify trustworthy content to cite.