Skip to content
WhyCited

A Chrome extension for researchers

Know why it’s cited — without opening the paper.

Right-click any citation and WhyCited explains, in a side panel, the role that reference plays in the exact passage you are reading — graded by the evidence it could actually see.

Coming soon to the Chrome Web Store · Free plan includes 5 analyses a month

The product

One right-click, one considered answer.

You are mid-paragraph and a citation appears. Instead of opening it in a new tab and losing your place, ask WhyCited. The side panel explains the role that reference plays in the passage you are reading — and shows its working.

The paper you are reading

Quarterly Review of Work & Organisation · Vol. 18 (3)

Autonomy, trust and engagement in distributed research teams

S. Marchetti · J. Okonkwo · L. Devine

2. Literature review

Interest in employee autonomy has grown alongside the shift to distributed work. Prior studies report a positive association between perceived autonomy and engagement (Okafor & Lindqvist, 2021), although the strength of that association appears to vary across sectors. Fewer studies have examined how trust moderates this relationship in fully remote teams, and the evidence that exists is largely cross-sectional.

Open link in new tab

Copy link address

Explain why this research is relevant

The WhyCited side panel
WhyCited

Perceived autonomy and work engagement: evidence from a cross-sector survey

Okafor, A. · Lindqvist, M. · 2021

Why it is relevant

Cited as prior evidence for the claim that perceived autonomy is associated with stronger engagement. The linked abstract reports a positive association in a cross-sector sample, consistent with the sentence it supports — though it does not address the sector-level variation the current authors go on to discuss.

Citation role

  • Supports
  • Contextualises

Current paper’s use

Establishes the autonomy–engagement association as prior evidence before the authors introduce trust as a moderator.

Linked paper’s contribution

Its abstract reports a positive association between perceived autonomy and engagement across 2,414 respondents in six sectors.

Evidence available

Current paper
Full text
Linked paper
Abstract only

Confidence: Moderate

Key evidence

Current paper — Literature review
“Prior studies report a positive association between perceived autonomy and engagement (Okafor & Lindqvist, 2021), although the strength of that association appears to vary across sectors.”
Linked paper — Abstract
“Across sectors, perceived autonomy showed a moderate positive association with work engagement (r = .41, p < .001).”

Limitations

  • The linked paper’s full text was not available. This assessment is based on its abstract.

How it works

From citation to explanation in three steps.

  1. Right-click a citation

    Reading a paper in Chrome — an HTML journal page, an arXiv listing, a repository copy — right-click any citation link and choose “Explain why this research is relevant”.

  2. It retrieves what is legally available

    WhyCited identifies both papers, resolves the DOI, and gathers what is openly accessible: full text where it exists, otherwise the abstract or bibliographic metadata. It never bypasses paywalls.

  3. You get an evidence-graded explanation

    The side panel explains the citation’s role in that exact passage — what the citing authors use it for, what the cited paper contributes — with the evidence declared and confidence graded honestly.

Evidence transparency

Every answer declares its evidence.

Most AI tools answer with the same fluency whether they have read the paper or only its title. WhyCited grades every explanation by what it could actually access — and says so, plainly, in the result.

Confidence — high, moderate, or low — reflects evidence availability and the clarity of the relationship, not model bravado. Thin evidence means low confidence, and the limitations section tells you why.

The four access levels

  • Full text

    The paper is openly accessible. The explanation can quote and weigh specific passages.

  • Abstract only

    The abstract is public but the body is not. The answer says so, and confidence is capped accordingly.

  • Metadata only

    Title, authors, venue, references. The relationship is inferred cautiously — and marked as such.

  • Unavailable

    Nothing could be retrieved. WhyCited tells you that plainly instead of guessing.

Pricing

Priced by how much you read.

Every plan gets the same honest analysis. Paid plans raise the monthly allowance; Pro and Lab add deep analysis for the citations that deserve a second look.

  • Free

    $0

    For deciding whether WhyCited belongs in your reading workflow.

    • 5 standard analyses / month
    • No deep analyses
    • No auto-escalation
  • Starter

    $4.99/mo

    For coursework and steady reading.

    • 200 standard analyses / month
    • No deep analyses
    • No auto-escalation
  • Pro

    Most popular

    $9.99/mo

    For active research, with deep analysis for the hard cases.

    • 500 standard analyses / month
    • 50 deep analyses / month
    • Hard cases auto-escalate to deep analysis
  • Lab

    $19.99/mo

    For literature reviews and heavy citation work.

    • 1,500 standard analyses / month
    • 150 deep analyses / month
    • Hard cases auto-escalate to deep analysis

Deep analysis re-reads ambiguous or complex citations with a stronger reasoning model (Claude) — conflicting evidence, unclear roles, tangled methodology. Standard analyses use a fast model (Gemini) that handles the clear-cut majority.

FAQ

Fair questions, straight answers.

Does it bypass paywalls?

No. WhyCited retrieves only openly accessible content and public metadata — Crossref, arXiv, open-access copies. When a paper is behind a paywall, the analysis says exactly what it could access, often the abstract or metadata alone, and grades its confidence accordingly.

What data does the extension send?

Nothing, until you right-click and ask. At that moment it sends only the citation context: the page and link URLs, the link text, the citation sentence with its surrounding paragraphs and nearest heading, and paper metadata visible on the page. Never your browsing history, cookies, or anything from other tabs.

Does it work on PDFs?

Partially. HTML pages — journal sites, arXiv, open repositories — work best. Chrome’s built-in PDF viewer limits what any extension can read, so on PDFs WhyCited currently works from the URL and the metadata it can identify, and the result says so. Fuller PDF extraction is on the roadmap.

Which AI models does it use?

Standard analyses use Google’s Gemini. Deep analyses escalate to Anthropic’s Claude for a more careful read of ambiguous citations. All model calls run on our backend — provider API keys stay server-side and are never present in the extension.

Do I need an account?

Yes. Every plan, including Free with its 5 analyses a month, requires an account — it is how quotas are metered and abuse is kept out. Accounts are launching shortly, alongside the Chrome Web Store listing.

Read with the context in place.

Five free analyses a month. No card required.

Get started freeComing soon to the Chrome Web Store