RMP.7:4.3 - Appraise support for the proposed findings

Use the criteria appropriate to the research tradition and each finding. Distinguish limitations within a study, dependence among contributions, selective availability across the corpus and applicability to the synthesis question. Their effects can differ across outcomes and interpretations.

Examine consequential exclusions and missing material. Distinguish evidence that was never sought, an eligible result not reported, a lost record and a source that cannot be accessed. Identify which conclusion might change; absence from the available corpus alone does not establish an absent effect, event or experience.

A large number of publications cannot repair common dependence. A global rating for each source cannot substitute for the relation that warrants an inference. Some weaker material may still provide context or challenge an interpretation; keep its supported role and limits explicit.

An individual claim defeated by its material or Method returns to RMP.5. Use RMP.6 when a remaining credibility choice can change the present synthesis or a worthwhile next move. Selecting an examination supplies no result from an examination not yet performed.