Home | Professional Service

Do you Show Up when Clients ask
AI for a Lawyer?

The Women's AI Visibility Institute Conducts the Nation's Most Rigorous State-by-State Research on AI Bias in the Legal Profession

For Most Women Attorneys we've Measured,
the Answer is No

When a Potential Client Asks AI Who to Hire - Will your Name Come Up?

Your potential clients are already using ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity to find attorneys. They're not Googling. They're asking AI. AI is answering, just not with your name.

Our research across 967 women attorneys in Colorado, Texas, and Florida reveals a systematic, measurable pattern: women attorneys are being left out of AI recommendations at alarming rates. Not because they lack credentials. Not because they lack experience. Because AI systems were trained on a digital record that underrepresents women, and most attorneys don't yet know how to fix it. This is the Double Bias Problem. And it's solvable.

Open ChatGPT, Gemini or Perplexity.

Type the question a potential client would type to find you:

If you're not on the list, you're not being considered. It's that simple, and it has nothing to do with how good a lawyer you are.

"Who are the best [your practice area] attorneys in

[your city]?"

Search Your Name

Count the Names.

Count the Women.

Count Yourself.

The Research Behind It

This isn't Opinion. It's Measurement.

You just ran an informal test. We run the rigorous one.

WAV Institute is a research institute, not a marketing agency. We've measured 967 women attorneys across three completed state studies, with a fourth in active data collection, scoring each across ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity on our /112 AI Visibility Framework, alongside technical schema and citation-source analysis. The pattern holds across every state: most women attorneys fall below the visibility line, and the reasons are structural, not personal.

STATE REPORT CARDS

Colorado — 209 women attorneys · 2 platforms Centerpiece finding - 94% of Colorado women attorneys lack proper schema markup. 86% have zero schema markup at all - only 14% have any, and just 6% have comprehensive schema.

Texas — 336 women attorneys · 3 platforms Centerpiece finding — "False Presence": 84% of valid Texas attorney sites carry schema markup, but only 28% use the correct LegalService designation. The signal is there. It's pointing the wrong way.

Florida — 422 women attorneys · 3 platforms · full /112 framework Centerpiece finding — "Platform Inversion": Gemini recognizes Florida women attorneys least, despite holding the most Knowledge Graph access.

New York — 523 women attorneys · in active data collection. Adding Claude as the 4th platform.

SUPPORTING STAT - In our 50-state Wikidata census, roughly 6.37% of documented attorney entities were women. The layer AI treats as ground truth is nearly empty which is a problem, and an opening.

The AI Visibility Audit measures exactly where you stand on ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity, the same three platforms, the same 20-point framework we used to evaluate 967 women attorneys across three states.

Run Now

Same framwork used in our Colorado and Texas sate reports | WAVI is an accredited CLE Sponsor (TX No.A18496) | Woman-owned Business

What We Build

We Build your Entity. One Engagement. One Price

Across 631 women attorneys studied in Colorado and Florida, 69% fell below AI visibility thresholds and not a single one had a Wikidata entity. AI doesn't recommend who is most qualified. It recommends who is most legible. Building your entity is how you become legible.

Infrastructure

the structured-data layer AI reads first. Schema deployment done correctly: the right LegalService designation, Person schema with bar number, FAQPage, and Google Business Profile alignment where ethically permissible.

Identity

a machine-readable identity that resolves to her. A Wikidata entity where notability thresholds are met, or a Readiness Roadmap where they aren't. Plus making sure every source references the exact same name and credentials for continuity alignment.

Authorship

AI distinguishes ghostwritten content from authentic attorney voice. Your writing is what makes the attribution credible. The AI Authorship Signals Guide: WAVI's evidence-based criteria for what AI reads as authorship authority, author schema, resolved bylines, owned-surface publishing, topical consistency.

Attribution

Nearly 20% of AI citations come from directories. If Avvo says one thing and Martindale says another, AI discounts both. Directory and aggregator alignment across Avvo, Super Lawyers, and Justia, so every source AI pulls from reinforces one coherent entity.

A deliverable, not a promise of rankings. WAVI builds the verifiable infrastructure of visibility. We don't promise placements no one controls.

Please note, "Authorship" as a framework and scaffolding. The attorney supplies the writing.

Keep it Current

Built to last, maintained to stay accurate.

Platforms, directories, and schema standards shift. For $997/year, annual maintenance keeps your entity current and defended. So the work you invested in doesn't quietly erode. Optional, and separate from the build.

Go Deeper
The Research Library

Go Deeper

Our full research is available. Read the state-by-state reports, or start with the book trilogy on how visibility is won and lost in the age of AI search.