CGL Quality Control and Assurance 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Which scenario best illustrates a 'preponderance of evidence' approach in genealogical quality control?
- Multiple independent sources consistently point to the same conclusion even though no single source is definitive (Correct answer)
- One government record overrides all other evidence by default
- The researcher selects the most recently created document as authoritative
- Oral tradition is weighted equally with vital records in all cases
Correct answer: Multiple independent sources consistently point to the same conclusion even though no single source is definitive
Preponderance of evidence means the cumulative weight of multiple independent, consistent sources tips the scales toward one conclusion even without a single decisive record.
Question 2: During a peer review of a genealogical case study, a reviewer notes that the author cited a published county history without indicating it is a secondary source. What standard is being evaluated?
- Accurate citations that include source layer identification so readers can assess reliability (Correct answer)
- Reasonably exhaustive search because county histories lack depth
- Proof argument because the author must resolve conflicting evidence
- Skilled analysis because secondary sources require additional interpretation
Correct answer: Accurate citations that include source layer identification so readers can assess reliability
Quality citations communicate the nature of each source so readers can independently evaluate its reliability; failing to identify a published history as secondary omits critical evaluative information.
Question 3: When evaluating 'information' within a source for quality control purposes, which question is most relevant?
- Was the informant a primary or secondary witness to the facts reported? (Correct answer)
- Was the document created before or after 1900?
- Is the document housed in a government repository?
- Was the document handwritten or typed?
Correct answer: Was the informant a primary or secondary witness to the facts reported?
The informant's proximity to the events (primary vs. secondary witness) directly affects the reliability of the information contained in any source.
Question 4: A CGL candidate's lecture contains a conclusion about an ancestor's birthplace that relies solely on a death certificate completed by a grandchild. A quality reviewer would flag this because:
- The grandchild is a secondary informant for birth information and the evidence is insufficient alone (Correct answer)
- Death certificates are derivative sources and cannot be cited at all
- The conclusion should be based on an original birth record regardless of availability
- Grandchildren are legally prohibited from reporting ancestral information
Correct answer: The grandchild is a secondary informant for birth information and the evidence is insufficient alone
A grandchild reporting a grandparent's birthplace is a secondary informant providing secondary information, making the death certificate alone insufficient to prove birthplace without corroboration.
Question 5: What does 'GPS element 5' (a soundly written conclusion) require that distinguishes it from the other GPS elements?
- The researcher must explicitly connect the evidence to the conclusion using a narrative or summary that others can follow and evaluate (Correct answer)
- The conclusion must be published in a peer-reviewed genealogical journal
- The conclusion must be expressed in standard genealogical numbering format
- The researcher must have the conclusion validated by a credentialed genealogist
Correct answer: The researcher must explicitly connect the evidence to the conclusion using a narrative or summary that others can follow and evaluate
Element 5 requires transparency — the written conclusion must show readers the logical path from evidence to conclusion so the reasoning can be scrutinized and replicated.
Question 6: In quality-controlled genealogical research, why is a GPS-compliant proof argument preferred over a simple list of supporting sources?
- A proof argument explicates the reasoning process and weighs conflicting evidence, while a source list alone cannot demonstrate analytical rigor (Correct answer)
- A proof argument is shorter and easier to publish than a source list
- Source lists are not accepted by lineage societies, so arguments must be used instead
- A proof argument eliminates the need to cite original documents
Correct answer: A proof argument explicates the reasoning process and weighs conflicting evidence, while a source list alone cannot demonstrate analytical rigor
A proof argument demonstrates how and why evidence supports a conclusion — analytical work that a raw list of sources cannot convey.
Question 7: A researcher finds three independent census records placing an ancestor in different counties in the same year. The best quality-control action is to:
- Investigate whether the records could represent different individuals and write a proof argument explaining the resolution (Correct answer)
- Accept the most recent census as definitive
- Discard all three records and seek a birth certificate instead
- Average the conflicting data to produce a composite conclusion
Correct answer: Investigate whether the records could represent different individuals and write a proof argument explaining the resolution
Conflicting records must be investigated for identity confusion and resolved through a reasoned analysis — not by arbitrary prioritization or averaging.
CGL Quality Control and Assurance 3
Which scenario best illustrates a 'preponderance of evidence' approach in genealogical quality control?