Archive correction log: source versions, units and publisher notices · RESEARCH-09543

Case 185 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · reader check exercise

Clarification for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: the point beginning “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 185 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · reader check exercise

Method note for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: use “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 185 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · reader check exercise

Limit of the answer in “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…” is an excerpt from the discussion, not an independent verification. A reader needs the relevant original material before treating an interpretation as established. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 185 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · reader check exercise

Summary draft for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: the answer addresses “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…”; the related point is “Report sample size, potential confounders…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 185 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · reader check exercise

Correction note for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: retain the wording beginning “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…” in the record. If later material changes it, add the date, the changed wording and the source for that change; do not invent a completed correction here. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 185 — Correlation in a small observational dataset · reader check exercise

Reader check for “Correlation in a small observational dataset”: distinguish the discussion point “Association does not identify direction or causation, and…” from its proposed application. The thread offers a way to reason about the question, without adding a personal experience or a newly observed outcome. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Two figures use different units and one axis is logarithmic. How should a comparison be documented?

Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise. Use the original answer fragment “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-09543/186: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Method note for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: use “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Clarification for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: the point beginning “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Limit of the answer in “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” is an excerpt from the discussion, not an independent verification. A reader needs the relevant original material before treating an interpretation as established. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Correction note for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: retain the wording beginning “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” in the record. If later material changes it, add the date, the changed wording and the source for that change; do not invent a completed correction here. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Reader check for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: distinguish the discussion point “Do not compare apparent visual distances…” from its proposed application. The thread offers a way to reason about the question, without adding a personal experience or a newly observed outcome. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 186 — Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error · reader check exercise

Summary draft for “Units and scale: prevent a silent comparison error”: the answer addresses “Do not compare apparent visual distances…”; the related point is “Record the original units and axis transformation, show any conversion…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.

Case 187 — Reading an abstract without skipping the methods · reader check exercise

A strong abstract conclusion is being discussed without the study methods. What should the reading note cover?

Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise. Use the original answer fragment “Assess whether the conclusion extends beyond the measurements and note what…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.

Exercise RESEARCH-09543/187: address this question within its stated limits.

Case 187 — Reading an abstract without skipping the methods · reader check exercise

Clarification for “Reading an abstract without skipping the methods”: the point beginning “Assess whether the conclusion extends beyond the measurements and note what…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: reader check. State what a new reader can and cannot infer from this exercise.