TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2010-07 > 1278595830


From: Michele Kemper <>
Subject: [TGF] EE Discussion - Fundamentals of Evidence Analysis - BasicIssues (1.3 Conclusions)
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 06:30:30 -0700 (PDT)


Hello, everyone.

Doing a complete search is just the beginning of evidence analysis. Once you
have the information, what do you do with it? That is what the next set of
sections begins to address. The next subsection begins to talk about extracting
and assessing data from the sources we get information from. We start with
drawing conclusions and proving them.

Here are a list of the subsections within the Basic Issues:

1.1 Analysis & Mindset
1.2 Completeness of research
1.3 Conclusions: hypothesis, theory & proof
1.4 Facts vs. assertion or claim
1.5 Family-history standards
1.6 Levels of confidence
1.7 Objectivity
1.8 Presentism
1.9 Quantity vs. quality
1.10 Technical knowledge
1.11 Truth

Discussion: 1.3 Conclusions: hypothesis, theory & proof

The books explains there are generally three levels of conclusions that we as
researchers can come to: hypothesis, theory, proof. For each one of these
levels, can you provide details on how you define each? What would move your
conclusions up or down on that spectrum (from hypothesis to theory, from theory
to proof, etc.)? Do you have any additions to this list of possible conclusions?
Have you ever been presented with a situation where you could not reach a
conclusion? Without revealing confidential client details, can you explain that
situation and what you did in the wake of the evidence?

Thanks,

Michele

This thread: