Where the source arguments live
Each pattern’s SoTA-Echoing section owns its substantive comparison: the working question, selected move, serious rival, trade-off, source limits and observation that would reopen it. Use that argument before relying on a citation. The following map is a return aid, not a second source doctrine, a field census or independent confirmation of the sources it condenses.
| Source-informed contribution | Source line used and substantive limit | Return when the answer changes |
|---|---|---|
| Engagement, participation and revisable framing | Smith and Shaw’s 2019 PSM characterization and Kogetsidis’s 2025 application review inform the continuing diverse PSM branch. Kelly and Gero 2022, Litster and colleagues 2024, and Nickel and colleagues 2024 inform non-equivalent frames and contextual revision. The bounded reviews and studies supply no universal ontology, representation guarantee or superior protocol. | PSD.1, PSD.2, PSD.3 and PSD.4: change the affected receiving-use, participation, formulation or boundary claim. |
| Model, Method and facilitation joins | Marttunen, Lienert and Belton 2017 provide the older critical PSM–MCDA combination anchor; Lami and Tavella 2019 supply an exploratory workshop contrast. Schwarzburg and colleagues 2024 distinguish confidence-related factors from validation. Franco and Greiffenhagen 2018 and Zimmermann and Curran 2023 contribute situated interaction evidence, not guaranteed consensus or general transfer. | PSD.5, PSD.6 and PSD.7: requalify the particular claim, Method contribution, join or attributed meaning. |
| Alternative construction, values and comparison | Borgonovo and colleagues’ 2026 decision-analysis synthesis and Greco, Słowiński and Wallenius’s 2025 MCDA synthesis inform selective analytical contributions and preference-model fit. Keeney 2012 is a historical generation ingredient; Marttunen and colleagues 2019 inform disciplined objective simplification. These sources do not supply the engagement’s values or warrant one total score. | PSD.8, PSD.9 and PSD.11: revisit material alternatives, lost value distinctions or the actual comparison relation. |
| Uncertainty, adaptation and robustness | Lempert and colleagues 2024 connect low-confidence knowledge to decision-relevant inquiry. The 2019 DAPP account contributes pathway timing and failure conditions; the 2026 decision-analysis synthesis informs sensitivity and information acquisition. Scenario membership establishes no probability, and a formal method supplies no local threshold or authority. | PSD.10 and PSD.12: narrow the stated range, reopen a reversal or qualify a feasible information question. |
| Professional recommendation and development-direction use | PSD.13 uses NCDA 2024 within its profession and selected ICMCI v4.0 engagement clauses as a bounded older comparator. The profile’s separate source account qualifies the used portions on 2 September 2026, including the ICMCI AI Code v1.0 of May 2026 for AI used by an adviser. That code is not AI-holder evaluation, and the older competence clauses are not represented as the complete latest standard. | PSD.13 and the profile source-responsibility account: revisit the service or source condition on which the advice relied. |
| Opportunity construction before a settled result | Phillips’s 2025 practitioner synthesis informs selective future exploration; NCDG 2024 supplies a bounded human information/alternative contribution; historical value-focused generation is one ingredient. Their combination supports a prospective construction Method, not empirical proof that its opportunities are reachable or effective. | The opportunity Method and its source-responsibility account: revise the changed search, dependency, reachability or next-question claim. |
| Follow-up under expected and unexpected change | Lynch and colleagues 2025 contribute domain-specific reconsideration triggers; Manley and colleagues 2026 contribute a perspective on targeted and broader observation. Their natural-resource settings do not set every client’s monitoring mix, threshold or institutional response. | PSD.14: reconsider the affected observation, interpretation, service obligation or recommendation use. |
| Professional Method development | PSM comparisons, Borgonovo and colleagues 2026 and Franco and colleagues’ 2021 behavioural-OR synthesis inform contribution-specific repertoire and evidence questions. Kogetsidis’s 2026 online review covers selected journals in 2010–2024; publication frequency is neither a practice census nor practical worth. | PSD.15: change the specific offering, applicability or evidence claim, not the whole repertoire merely because a paper appeared. |
| Simultaneous inquiry | The older expert/facilitated contrast in Franco and Montibeller 2010, Franco and Nielsen’s 2018 workshops, Franco and colleagues 2021 and Cunico and colleagues 2024 support bounded comparisons of interaction and challenge arrangements. They do not make one staffing or participation design universally best. | PSD.16: requalify the actual interaction and local test; use C.32.MWA only when several structures need a joint synthesis. |
| Cultural continuation | Yearworth’s 2024 chapter summaries inform a practice-facing account. Voltan and Kells 2026 remain a conceptual GenAI-assisted proposal requiring practical testing; Czaplicka, Baumann and Rahwan 2025 offer a simplified mediation model. Neither publication, generated output nor a modeled mechanism proves professional uptake or cultural effect. | PSD.17: revise the population scope or the affected claim about receiving interpretation, mediation or continuation. |
Publication years identify sources; they do not by themselves identify a qualification window or show that a claim is still reliable. Older anchors remain useful for the particular contribution named above, while later work can repair their limits. Currentness is bounded to the actual inspected claim and intended use. No table here guarantees continuous monitoring or validates a local case.