Back

Research operations · evidence chain

A claim becomes publishable by following its evidence chain—not by sounding researched

DEPTH-10 operationalizes the recovered research rule: Claim → Source → Evidence → Review → Status → Last Updated. If a link is missing, narrow the wording rather than filling the gap with confidence.

Classify the claim first

A principle, historical fact, statistic, causal statement, effectiveness claim, validation claim, professional statement and runtime claim need different evidence. Do not treat them as one category.

Source class matters

Primary/authoritative records, qualified institutions/professionals, peer-reviewed/high-quality secondary sources, reviewed internal syntheses, participant-provided records and exploratory notes carry different authority. Scope stays limited even for strong sources.

Evidence must state what it does not prove

A screenshot may prove a visible state at a moment without proving source identity. A completed task may prove completion without proving impact. User appreciation proves appreciation, not effectiveness.

Allowed and forbidden wording belong in the register

The Claim Register should preserve current allowed wording and stronger unsupported wording. This turns evidence into practical publishing control.

Reflection

Questions to sit with

  1. What kind of claim is this?
  2. What evidence directly supports it?
  3. What stronger conclusion remains unsupported?

One safe next action

Complete one Claim → Source → Evidence Record before changing a high-impact public statement.