TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2010-09 > 1285770293


From: Harold Henderson <>
Subject: Re: [TGF] Negative Evidence
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:24:53 -0500
References: <D7E8456F7C7E4F5B84D798727AECE7E6@Media>
In-Reply-To: <D7E8456F7C7E4F5B84D798727AECE7E6@Media>


Christy --

The more different ideas I hear about "negative evidence," the more I am
inclined not to use the term at all, just describe whatever the situation
is, or at least be very clear how I am using the term. I look forward to
hearing other approaches.

Baseline: page 25, section 1.14 of EE: Negative evidence = "An inference we
can draw from the absence of information that should exist under particular
circumstances."

Note that the inference could be quite limited, say if we're looking at a
birth register known to have very incomplete coverage of births in that time
and place.

The citation requirements for this kind of evidence (whatever you call it!)
are, of necessity, pretty stringent: pp. 463-464, section 9.37.

Harold

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Christy Fillerup <
> wrote:

> It seems like we have a bit of a semantics question. I'm interested in the
> group consensus. How would you define "Negative Evidence"?
>
> Christy
> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive
> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to
> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list.
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>



--
Harold Henderson
Research and Writing from NW Indiana
midwestroots.net

This thread: