{
  "title": "Product review usefulness survey",
  "questions": [
    "Which review detail helped your decision?",
    "What experience context was missing?",
    "What label would help assess relevance?"
  ],
  "question_notes": [
    "The helpful review detail identifies what shoppers use to judge relevance to their decision. Preserve verified experience context without treating selected reviews as representative evidence.",
    "Missing experience context reveals whether shoppers can judge what a review actually describes. Preserve verified usage circumstances and dates where available, without fabricating attribution or treating selected reviews as representative product evidence.",
    "A useful relevance label identifies the context readers need to assess a review, such as variant or date. Publish only information supported by actual attribution."
  ],
  "answer_guidance": [
    {
      "question": 1,
      "format": "Optional short text",
      "reason": "Retain the specific point or condition described; avoid replacing it with an unexplained rating."
    },
    {
      "question": 2,
      "format": "Optional written explanation",
      "reason": "Keep context that distinguishes different experiences. Do not fabricate reviews or imply unverified purchases."
    },
    {
      "question": 3,
      "format": "Optional improvement suggestion",
      "reason": "Keep the suggested change separate from whether it has been tested. Show verified variant context where available."
    }
  ],
  "respondent_instruction": "If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.",
  "note": "Examples to adapt. Not a validated instrument."
}