{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp06_four_proposal_generalization60_20260803","source_assessment_id":"negative_space_design__rhetoric:P3:v0","cell_id":"negative_space_design__rhetoric","proposal_index":3,"qualification":"EMPIRICAL_PARTNER_CANDIDATE","criteria":{"specific_differentiated_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposal makes a specific falsifiable incremental claim: compared with a pinned correction followed by normal posting, a signaled, maximum-four-hour pause of recoverable routine posts will improve identification of the corrected claim and reduce tonal displacement without impairing urgent-help availability or context."},"credible_problem_signal":{"status":"YES","reason":"External evidence shows that correction prominence affects whether audiences encounter corrections, self-retractions can improve belief accuracy, and social-post attention decays rapidly. The exact prevalence of institution-caused displacement remains uncertain, but the underlying problem signal is credible rather than speculative."},"identifiable_partner_or_adopter":{"status":"YES","reason":"Institutional communications teams, regulated editors, senior editorial managers, supervisory editors, and public-affairs units controlling owned channels are concrete adopter classes with documented correction and publication authority."},"partner_access_is_necessary":{"status":"YES","reason":"Resolving the remaining uncertainties requires access to owned-channel correction and posting logs, authentic queue and exemption cases, authorized operators, and institution-specific authority and service-continuity rules; ordinary public research cannot supply these."},"safe_authorized_first_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A partner-authorized mock-feed experiment and tabletop exercise can use fictional content without interrupting a live channel, while preserving urgent-message overrides, accessibility review, queued content, and explicit halt criteria."},"bounded_decisive_empirical_design":{"status":"YES","reason":"The supplied three-condition design compares normal posting, repeated promotion, and the landing window with approximately 90 consenting participants and six operators. Predefined comprehension, interpretation, urgent-help, override, queue-preservation, and audit outcomes support a bounded feasibility go/no-go decision."},"no_material_negative_gate":{"status":"YES","reason":"No verified pipeline gate is materially NO: the testable claim, adopter authority, bounded evidence step, safety/authority status, and cost scope pass. The sole uncertain gate concerns exact problem prevalence, which partner logs are positioned to resolve."},"not_merely_more_research":{"status":"YES","reason":"The next step specifies the partner access, three comparators, participant and operator samples, measured outcomes, operational drill, and explicit conditions that prevent progression to live use."}},"uncertainty_types":["PROBLEM_PREVALENCE","ADOPTER_PULL","INCREMENTAL_EFFECT","WORKFLOW_FIT","DATA_ACCESS"],"partner_profile":"An institutional communications, newsroom, or public-affairs unit that controls owned social channels, has formal correction authority, uses scheduled publication queues, and can involve accuracy, safety, service, legal, and accessibility owners.","required_access":"De-identified owned-channel logs linking substantive corrections to subsequent institutional posts; representative scheduled queues and exemption scenarios; six authorized channel operators; correction and publication authority maps; and partner adoption criteria. No live-channel interruption is required initially.","bounded_empirical_test":"With partner authorization, construct three matched fictional feeds: pinned correction with normal posting, repeated correction promotion, and pinned correction with a signaled four-hour-equivalent landing window. Randomly assign about 90 consenting participants across conditions and measure correction identification, context errors, accountability versus evasion, tonal collision, trust, and urgent-help availability. In parallel, six partner operators classify a mixed queue, execute an urgent override, resume publication, and document disagreement, latency, queue loss, and audit failures.","success_condition":"The landing-window condition directionally improves unaided correction identification over the pinned-normal-posting comparator, reduces tonal displacement, preserves necessary context and perceived urgent-help availability, and permits every simulated urgent message to be published with the queue and audit record intact. Partner log review also shows that post-correction routine-message competition occurs often enough to justify further testing.","falsification_condition":"Do not advance if logs show no meaningful correction displacement problem; the landing window does not outperform pinned normal posting on correction identification; it materially increases evasion, outage, or unavailable-support interpretations; required context becomes less recoverable; any urgent message is withheld or materially delayed; or the queue, resumption, or audit procedure fails.","rationale":"This is an appropriate empirical-partner candidate because adjacent practices already establish correction governance, pinning, and recoverable queue pauses, while a narrow differentiated claim remains unresolved. The decisive uncertainties—real-world prevalence, adopter pull, incremental recipient effect, and authorized workflow performance—require institutional data and operators and can be tested safely in a bounded comparator-based simulation before any live deployment."}