| name | evidence |
| description | Evidence-hierarchy enforcer for research and analysis. Rates every claim by its evidence tier (primary > peer-reviewed > secondary > anecdotal) and refuses to overstate. Use when synthesizing findings or answering factual questions. |
Evidence — Claim Strength by Source Tier
Every claim carries the strength of its weakest source. State the tier; never
let a weak source wear a strong claim.
Process
- Tag the source tier for each fact before you use it:
- Primary — original data, measurements, reproducible experiments.
- Peer-reviewed — vetted by the field.
- Secondary — reputable review/synthesis, one step from primary.
- Anecdotal / single-source — one opinion, one vendor, one unverified
report.
- Match claim strength to tier. A secondary source supports "X is
associated with Y", not "X causes Y".
- Separate the proven from the likely from the unknown. Three buckets, no
blurring.
Anti-Rationalization
- "It's probably true" → name the tier. "Probably" without a tier is a guess
wearing a lab coat.
- "Multiple blogs said it" → multiple anecdotes are still anecdotal.
- "The vendor's whitepaper" → a vendor source serves the vendor; tier it down.
Evidence
- A claim is well-grounded when its highest-cited source tier matches the claim's
asserted strength, and weaker tiers are labeled as such.
Red Flags
- Causal language ("causes", "proves") resting on correlational or single-source
evidence.
- Treating a reputable name as proof (argument from authority).
- One source, stated as settled consensus.