Ergo Workspace

Sources

Why the site uses specific ergonomic references and how they support decisions.

Sources and references

Where the decision logic is grounded.

The site uses general ergonomic reference, measurement logic, and maintained correction notes to keep the output reviewable. Sources are part of the product system, not an afterthought glued into the footer.

General ergonomic reference

Broad relationships between screen, desk, chair, reach, and work duration.

Measurement logic reference

Desk height, screen distance, eye-line, and body-height relationships.

Correction and review notes

Used to dial back weak language and improve explanation quality when earlier outputs overstated certainty.

Where sources should appear

Methodology page, sources page, tool interpretation block, and support guide reference sections.

Why this matters

Trust comes from visible maintenance and reviewable explanation, not just from linking a few studies in the footer.

Source discipline

The source system here is deliberately grouped so that different types of support can be traced to different roles. Broad ergonomic references support high-level relationships between the chair, desk, screen, and work duration. Measurement logic supports narrower interpretation questions. Correction notes support maintenance and revision when an explanation becomes stale or too confident.

This matters for trust. A site that gives ergonomic guidance without a visible source posture is harder to review and easier to dismiss as filler. The source page exists to make the logic reviewable, not just to list references for decoration.

How sources are used

A source on this site is not a decorative citation added after the writing. Sources are meant to support the underlying logic of a page: what kinds of posture or setup signals matter, where the limits of a geometry-based interpretation sit, and when a narrower answer is more honest than a broad one. That means sources are selected for interpretive value, not just for the appearance of authority.

A page that cannot explain what its sources are doing in the logic chain is not ready. The right source posture is legible, limited, and tied back to decisions the user can actually make.

Why source grouping matters

Grouping sources by role helps keep the site honest. Broad ergonomic references should not be presented as if they prove a very narrow measurement claim, and a narrow technical reference should not be inflated into a whole-workstation conclusion. Splitting these roles makes it easier to review whether a page is staying within its evidence lane.

That reviewability is part of the trust model. A reviewer should be able to see that the site is trying to clarify limits, not hide them.

Why a source page is not just a citation pile

A source page is more useful when it explains what kinds of references the site relies on and what role they play in the decision chain. Broad ergonomic sources support relationships between desk, chair, screen, reach, and duration. Measurement logic supports narrower geometry interpretation. Correction notes support maintenance when real review exposes weak wording or route drift.

That is more useful than dropping undigested citations into a footer and pretending the trust problem is solved.

What a reader should infer from the source posture

The presence of a source page should tell the reader that the site is trying to make its reasoning inspectable, not that it is trying to hide uncertainty behind the existence of references. A trustworthy source posture narrows claims, ties references to roles, and leaves room for future correction when a route proves too broad or too confident.

That is the kind of source posture more likely to survive review, because it shows not only that sources exist, but also how the site uses them and where their limits begin.