RMP.6:4.3 - Match the credibility move to the threat

Move	Comparison to make	What the result cannot establish by itself
Computational reproduction	Use the identified data, analysis and relevant environment to compare the output actually obtained with the reported result under a justified tolerance.	Agreement does not establish the model’s substantive adequacy, a causal claim or transfer to another setting. Missing access and unsuccessful execution are not discrepant outputs.
New-data replication	Compare a target claim using new material and a justified corresponding design. State what is held comparable, what differs and the agreement criterion.	A matching or non-matching significance label alone does not settle effect magnitude, uncertainty, equivalence or every proposed explanation.
Robustness or sensitivity	Examine plausible analytical, parameter, missingness or model choices that can change the conclusion under the declared question.	Favorable selected variants do not establish robustness over unexamined choices; a changed target quantity is a different claim, not another interchangeable estimate.
Validation for a use	Examine the empirical and conceptual relation between the model, measure or result and its intended use under supplied domain criteria.	Fitting to calibration material or checking implementation does not by itself establish adequacy for the intended use. Use challenging material separate from fitting where the claim requires it.
Triangulation or corroboration	Compare what differently limited Methods or sources contribute, their dependence and the relation expected among their results.	Agreement among copies is not independent corroboration; differing results need not be averaged into a common claim.
Transfer examination	Identify differences between source and receiving populations, settings, periods, materials or practices that can change the claimed relation.	Success in the source context does not supply an unrestricted target-context result.

Use a disciplinary variant with its explicit meaning when that changes the examination. The moves are a repertoire, not stages or a maturity scale. Several can be useful together only when their contributions and the relation between their results justify the combination.

A test must bear on the actual threat. Reproducing a simulation cannot replace a missing mechanism comparison. An inter-coder reliability procedure cannot validate a reflexive thematic interpretation merely because both involve interviews. Replicating a unique historical event is not the test of its source chronology; source criticism or corroboration may be.