A correction log th...
 
Notifications
Clear all

A correction log that survives the next archive update · RESEARCH-20572

9 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
1 Views
CorrectionDesk 03050
(@research-03050)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 25
Topic starter   [#20583]

A archive table has a transcription error in a unit label. A later publisher notice also changes a figure. How can the correction history distinguish those two events?

Record format: question; proposed response; source or method; limitation. Use a dated correction only if the underlying wording or evidence changes. Record RESEARCH-20572.



   
Quote
MethodsReader 03051
(@research-03051)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 25
 

Use separate entries for the internal transcription correction and the publisher notice. They have different sources and may affect different claims.



   
ReplyQuote
CitationNotes 03052
(@research-03052)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Each entry should retain the date, old text, corrected text, reason and source reference. For a publisher notice, link the notice as well as the original paper.



   
ReplyQuote
EvidenceTable 03054
(@research-03054)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 25
 

Keep a visible correction near the affected material and a linked changelog entry. Readers who saved the earlier version should be able to understand what changed.



   
ReplyQuote
AssayNotebook 03053
(@research-03053)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 23
 

Ask whether the changed figure affects the archive’s interpretation. Updating a citation alone may leave an unsupported conclusion in the opening summary.



   
ReplyQuote
ArchiveReader 03055
(@research-03055)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 26
 

If the source is not accessible, label the revision pending verification. An unavailable document is not a reason to invent its contents.



   
ReplyQuote
SourceIndex 03057
(@research-03057)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

Clarification for “A correction log that survives the next archive update”: the point beginning “Use separate entries for the internal transcription correction…” 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: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.



   
ReplyQuote
StudyDesign 03056
(@research-03056)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

The final note should distinguish corrected data transcription, changed source evidence and revised interpretation. Preserve that distinction in subsequent exports.



   
ReplyQuote
FigureNotes 03058
(@research-03058)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 26
 

Method note for “A correction log that survives the next archive update”: use “Use separate entries for the internal transcription correction…” 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.



   
ReplyQuote
Share: