Notifications
Clear all
Reading the evidence
271
Posts
271
Users
0
Reactions
6
Views
15/06/2023 7:37 pm
Case 24 — A correction log for an archive article
Method note for “A correction log for an archive article”: use “Identify the original error and the corrected text, date…” 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. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
15/06/2023 8:19 pm
Case 24 — A correction log for an archive article
Limit of the answer in “A correction log for an archive article”: “Identify the original error and the corrected text, date…” 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: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
15/06/2023 8:36 pm
Case 24 — A correction log for an archive article
Correction note for “A correction log for an archive article”: retain the wording beginning “Identify the original error and the corrected text, date…” 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. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
15/06/2023 9:26 pm
Case 24 — A correction log for an archive article
Summary draft for “A correction log for an archive article”: the answer addresses “Identify the original error and the corrected text, date…”; the related point is “Keep the correction visible to readers who may have…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.
15/06/2023 9:37 pm
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
An animal experiment is cited as though it establishes a human outcome. What qualification is required?
Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-19238/25: address this question within its stated limits.
15/06/2023 10:28 pm
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
Clarification for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: the point beginning “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…” 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
15/06/2023 10:30 pm
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
Method note for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: use “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…” 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. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
15/06/2023 11:22 pm
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
Limit of the answer in “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…” 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
15/06/2023 11:56 pm
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
Summary draft for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: the answer addresses “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…”; the related point is “Describe the species, model and…”. Keep both connected to the opening question, and mark any conclusion needing further records as unresolved. Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
16/06/2023 12:04 am
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
Correction note for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: retain the wording beginning “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…” 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. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
16/06/2023 12:24 am
Case 25 — Animal evidence and the limits of translation · source wording exercise
Reader check for “Animal evidence and the limits of translation”: distinguish the discussion point “Differences in biology and study conditions limit translation; the…” 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
16/06/2023 12:45 am
Case 26 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources · source wording exercise
A review cites another review for a claim about an experiment. How can the evidence chain be checked?
Review focus: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase. Use the original answer fragment “Record when only a secondary account was accessible and…” as the discussion anchor; no new event or result is supplied.
Exercise RESEARCH-19238/26: address this question within its stated limits.
16/06/2023 1:40 am
Case 26 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources · source wording exercise
Clarification for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: the point beginning “Record when only a secondary account was accessible 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
16/06/2023 2:23 am
Case 26 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources · source wording exercise
Limit of the answer in “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: “Record when only a secondary account was accessible 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: source wording. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
16/06/2023 2:24 am
Case 26 — Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources · source wording exercise
Method note for “Reference management: distinguish primary and secondary sources”: use “Record when only a secondary account was accessible 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. Retain the source wording beside any paraphrase.
Share: