Analytical Methods and Techniques Flashcards

What distinguishes a 'proof argument' from a 'proof summary' under the GPS?

Answer: A proof argument is a thorough written analysis; a proof summary is a concise statement for simpler conclusions

A proof argument is a detailed written narrative used for complex or conflicting evidence, while a proof summary briefly states a well-supported conclusion for simpler cases.

Which analytical error occurs when a researcher assumes that the absence of evidence for an event proves the event did not occur?

Answer: Argument from ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantiam)

Absence of evidence only proves the searched records do not document the event; it does not prove the event did not happen, especially when record survival is incomplete.

How does 'reasonably exhaustive' differ from 'absolutely exhaustive' in GPS terminology?

Answer: Reasonably exhaustive reflects what a competent genealogist would do given available resources; absolutely exhaustive is an impossible standard

The GPS uses 'reasonably exhaustive' because no researcher can consult every record ever created; the standard is professional competence, not perfection.

A genealogist uses the FAN club (Family, Associates, Neighbors) method to trace a subject who disappears from records after 1870. What is the analytical rationale?

Answer: Tracing known associates may reveal migration routes or records that mention the subject indirectly

When direct records of a subject are absent, records of their FAN club often mention them, reveal their location, or show migration patterns that guide further research.

What is the significance of 'informant' analysis when evaluating a death certificate's reported birthplace?

Answer: The informant's relationship to and knowledge of the deceased determines the reliability of the birthplace information

A surviving spouse who knew the deceased well provides more reliable birthplace information than a child who never knew the deceased's parents.

When does a GPS-compliant conclusion require a full proof argument rather than a proof statement?

Answer: When evidence conflicts, is indirect, or requires complex reasoning to support the conclusion

A full written proof argument is required when the conclusion rests on indirect evidence, conflicting sources, or reasoning that a reader cannot independently follow without explanation.

A genealogist concludes that two men named Thomas Reed in an 1850 county are different individuals. What type of proof work supports this conclusion?

Answer: A negative identity proof showing the evidence is inconsistent with a single individual

Distinguishing between same-name individuals requires showing that the evidence for each is incompatible with a single identity, using a negative identity proof.