Judge the connected result
The practical entries are recognition aids. Correct use requires the reasons and conditions in the complete bodies. Inherit the RMP.1 checklist for a passing brief, the RMP.2 checklist for a design disposition, the RMP.3 checklist for operationalization, the RMP.4 checklist for the trace, the RMP.5 checklist for analysis and claim criticism, the RMP.6 checklist for the credibility decision, the RMP.7 checklist for synthesis and the RMP.8 checklist for revision/return and the RMP.9 checklist for Method retention or change. For the contributions actually combined, also examine their connection:
| Substantive question | A usable answer and its return when absent |
|---|---|
| Does the design answer the same bounded question for the same receiver and useful stop? | Show the brief positions used by the comparison. Requalify a changed question; obtain an unresolved material, population, context, or source relation instead of assuming compatibility. |
| Does the completion concern sufficient evidence or the present allocation with insufficient evidence? | Preserve the adequate answer for EvidenceSufficientStop, or the bounded answer and no-new-study reason for QualifiedNoNewStudy. A missing result holds only the selection it prevents; resource and authority decisions retain their owners. |
| Can the chosen strategy expose the criticism demand, including the dependence and disagreement of any components? | Name the defeating or narrowing result and the shared assumptions. Apply the whole-combination conditions when several Methods contribute. |
| For a design selection still needed, could remaining values alone or jointly change the family, criticism, feasibility or refusal? | Return ResearchDesignHold when those values prevent that selection. Only an actually selected design can retain invariant PostSelectionNeed. A completed QualifiedNoNewStudy answer keeps its evidence limit without turning it into an acquisition. |
| Do the operational choices still support the selected question and criticism? | Follow one consequential observation or source choice through the whole arrangement. Name a blocked action or return a defeated premise under RMP.3; do not hide a changed design in protocol detail. |
| Does the receiving examination have the actual material and access it needs? | Use RMP.4 to distinguish plans, conduct, reconstruction, transformations and loss. State the particular examinations still supported and those prevented. |
| Does the analysis warrant the proposed claim under its Method? | RMP.5 follows the material-to-claim connection and retains consequential choices, contrary material, uncertainty and unsupported stronger uses. |
| Does the credibility examination address the actual threat, and is it obtainable and worthwhile? | RMP.6 compares the meaningful result with the whole arrangement, preserves a useful no-new-test answer, and distinguishes selection from actual performance. |
| Does the corpus answer preserve the question, source dependence and warranted transformation? | RMP.7 distinguishes independent support, compatible synthesis, context and missing material. A refusal states the narrower supported result. |
| Does the revision concern the same assertion and reach the actual use that needs it? | RMP.8 reconciles affected claims, preserves uncertainty and returns the permitted correction through its responsible owner. |
| Does the Method decision address the actual subject and change only its dependent use? | RMP.9 separates supported retention, bounded correction, worthwhile evidence acquisition and restricted use; RMP.5/RMP.8 or another actual consumer receives only the consequential return. |
| What has actually been returned, and what can the receiver do with it now? | Identify the supplied answer, brief, design disposition, operational specification, limited trace, bounded claim/criticism, credibility decision and actual test result when one exists, corpus synthesis, exact knowledge revision and return, or supported Method retention or change. The receiving action still needs its own criteria and authority. |
These questions test the present result; counting completed rows does not establish that evidence exists or that Work occurred. A direct use of RMP.2 with a compatible supplied brief needs no second RMP.1 record. When one premise changes, revisit the result and combinations that rely on it while retaining unaffected work.