{"actors":["Head of performance, the focal actor because the season review and monitoring protocol bear that role's name","Strength-and-conditioning coaches who planned and adjusted exposure","Team physicians and physiotherapists who classified symptoms, set restrictions, and cleared return to play","Position coaches and head coach who accepted, modified, or overrode training recommendations","Athletes who reported symptoms and enacted or resisted modified loads","Sports scientists and analysts who maintained monitoring data and thresholds","Operations staff who set travel and training schedules","Club executives and medical-governance reviewers who may use the explanation"],"affected_objective":"Explain the conditional contribution of the head of performance to the first team's change in time-loss hamstring-injury burden during one competitive season versus the preceding season, for protocol learning rather than personnel praise, blame, compensation, or discipline.","arm":"COMMON_P1","authority_safety":{"authorized_first_step":"The club medical-governance chair may authorize a retrospective, de-identified review of the two specified seasons using records already held under existing clinical and performance-data permissions.","decision_authority":"The medical-governance committee owns the causal synthesis; team clinicians validate injury classifications, athletes control any new testimonial participation, and employment, selection, or disciplinary authorities must make separate decisions under their own standards.","excluded_actions":["Changing an athlete's training, treatment, selection, or return-to-play status from the retrospective analysis","Using causal prominence as proof of competence, negligence, moral worth, or employment liability","Collecting new athlete health data without consent and applicable privacy review","Publishing identifiable medical or staff-performance information","Presenting substitution or structural counterfactuals as observed outcomes"],"halt_rollback":"Halt if injury definitions cannot be harmonized, timestamps are materially incomplete, consent or data authority is disputed, or reviewers begin using provisional attribution for personnel action; quarantine the synthesis, retain the existing clinical record unchanged, and revert communications to a descriptive two-season timeline."},"baseline":"The season review credits the named head of performance by aligning the injury dashboard with that person's arrival and branded monitoring protocol. It does not separately trace threshold design, coaching compliance, athlete reporting, clinical judgment, fixture congestion, roster composition, inherited data infrastructure, or distributed execution, and it does not test replacement or changed-structure counterfactuals.","candidate_id":"agency_structure_attribution_balance__sport_science__COMMON_P1","causal_chain":["The club's organizational chart, access to monitoring data, and executive sponsorship place the head of performance at an information and coordination bottleneck, making that person both consequential and narratively focal.","The head of performance interprets workload and symptom information, chooses escalation thresholds, convenes staff, and recommends exposure changes; these are actor-specific decisions rather than personality attributes.","Sports scientists, clinicians, strength-and-conditioning coaches, position coaches, and athletes translate, negotiate, override, or enact those recommendations, so implementation fidelity and informal adaptation mediate the focal actor's influence.","Fixture density, travel, squad depth, playing surface, prior injuries, medical rules, coach incentives, and inherited monitoring technology constrain the available choices and may independently alter exposure and recovery.","The resulting pattern of high-speed running, recovery, symptom escalation, rehabilitation, and return-to-play decisions forms the proposed pathway to the bounded injury-burden outcome.","Reports, meeting minutes, dashboards, and interviews disproportionately associated with the formal leader can compress distributed work into personal credit, while aggregate injury counts can conceal turning-point decisions.","Actor-substitution and structural-relaxation probes determine whether the same position, staff coalition, data system, and schedule could plausibly have produced the pathway under a different occupant, or whether the focal decisions depended on those structures.","The synthesis assigns initiation, enabling, blocking, coordination, execution, amplification, and symbolic roles with uncertainty, without converting causal contribution into praise, blame, or authority over personnel decisions."],"cell_id":"agency_structure_attribution_balance__sport_science","consequence":"Without the intervention, the club may copy or discard the wrong parts of the monitoring protocol, misattribute clinicians' and athletes' implementation work, treat schedule or roster effects as leadership effects, and use an unbounded story in succession or personnel decisions.","diversity_from_prior_proposals":"The candidate is organized around attribution of a named performance leader for a bounded injury outcome, with paired person-substitution and training-system counterfactuals; it is not a generic injury-prevention program, workload model, coaching evaluation, or narrative-only audit.","experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp13_second_slot_policy60_20260806","intervention":"Run a two-season Conditional Performance Contribution Review. Freeze the outcome definition and comparison window; build a de-identified event timeline linking monitoring signals, recommendations, overrides, implemented exposures, symptoms, diagnoses, and return-to-play decisions; inventory focal, distributed, opposing, and affected actors; map formal authority, data access, schedule, resources, incentives, and inherited practices; classify each evidenced contribution by causal role and timing; compare micro-level decision episodes with the season-level injury pattern; audit whose records and recollections dominate; and test bounded counterfactuals for a plausible alternate role occupant, delayed focal action, unchanged staff without the focal actor, and altered schedule, roster depth, escalation authority, or data access. Publish a versioned synthesis stating conditions, replaceability, alternative models, uncertainty, and responsibility limits.","mechanism_mapping":[{"counterfactual_removal":"Without the matrix, the review can relabel the same leader-centered chronology without distinguishing decisions, conditions, execution, and evidentiary support.","mechanism_slug":"actor_structure_evidence_matrix","role":"Cross-tabulates dated actor actions and omissions with schedule, resources, rules, data access, causal role, and observed downstream state."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without multilevel process tracing, a recommendation can be mistaken for an implemented exposure change or an aggregate season pattern for a demonstrated mechanism.","mechanism_slug":"process_tracing_across_levels","role":"Connects individual interpretation to staff negotiation, athlete-level exposure, clinical escalation, and the team-level outcome."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without substitution probes, the review cannot distinguish effects of the office, coalition, and inherited system from choices specific to its occupant.","mechanism_slug":"counterfactual_actor_substitution_probe","role":"Tests absence, delay, and a plausible alternate qualified occupant under the same information, authority, staff, and time constraints."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without structural relaxation, the focal actor may be treated as either decisive or irrelevant even when schedule, squad depth, data access, or override authority condition the contribution.","mechanism_slug":"structural_constraint_relaxation_probe","role":"Tests whether focal decisions remain operative under bounded changes to fixture density, staffing, resources, escalation rules, or monitoring infrastructure."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without aligned timelines, vivid individual episodes and season aggregates cannot be checked for temporal fit or aggregation loss.","mechanism_slug":"paired_micro_macro_timeline","role":"Aligns decision episodes, training exposures, symptoms, diagnoses, absences, and contextual changes across athlete and team scales."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without the focal-actor audit, source abundance and branded artifacts may continue to stand in for causal weight while informal implementation and dissent remain missing.","mechanism_slug":"narrative_focal_actor_audit","role":"Records why the leader is prominent and compares source visibility with mechanism evidence from clinicians, coaches, athletes, and operations staff."},{"counterfactual_removal":"Without plural review, one convenient account may close prematurely and causal attribution may leak into employment judgment.","mechanism_slug":"plural_causal_synthesis_review","role":"Retains rival explanations, conflicting evidence, sensitivity, uncertainty, and the boundary between explanation and responsibility."}],"nearest_rivals":["A workload-risk model that predicts injury from exposure variables but does not attribute the decisions and structures producing those exposures","A staff performance appraisal that evaluates the head of performance against role expectations but does not establish causal contribution","A clinical injury audit that checks diagnosis and rehabilitation quality without testing leadership substitution or organizational constraints","A narrative or interview audit that identifies whose account dominates but does not trace the outcome mechanism","A before-and-after comparison of injury counts around the leader's appointment that does not separate concurrent changes"],"negative_tests":{"intervention_falsifier":"The review is falsified as an attribution improvement if independent blinded coders cannot reproduce its action-to-state links from the record, or if its synthesis does not change when focal-actor identifiers, actor-substitution probes, and structural probes are removed.","problem_falsifier":"The proposed problem is absent if the club's operative account already fixes the same outcome and window, distinguishes the focal person's actions from role authority and distributed execution, tests bounded actor and structural counterfactuals, preserves rival models, and prevents causal findings from determining responsibility.","risks":["Retrospective records may encode the formal leader's view more richly than athletes' or implementers' actions.","Changing injury definitions, exposure measurement, or squad composition between seasons may make the comparison unstable.","Counterfactual substitutes may be implausibly skilled, informed, trusted, or empowered.","Sensitive health and employment information could be exposed or repurposed.","Participants may rationalize decisions after knowing the season outcome.","A complex synthesis may create false balance when evidence strongly favors one mechanism.","Aggregate injury burden may hide athlete-level harms, recurrent injuries, or transfers out of observation.","Management may ignore the responsibility boundary and use provisional causal prominence in personnel decisions."],"strongest_counterevidence":"A harmonized record may show that the relevant exposure rules, escalation thresholds, staff routines, and injury trajectory were already established before the focal actor arrived, or that contemporaneous recommendations were routinely overridden, leaving no evidenced actor-specific pathway beyond occupying the position."},"next_evidence_step":"For one first-team squad and exactly two completed seasons, sample all recorded time-loss hamstring cases plus a predeclared set of matched high-exposure non-cases; have two reviewers independently reconstruct the dated signal-to-decision-to-exposure-to-clinical-state chain from existing de-identified records, then conduct one bounded substitution probe and one schedule-constraint probe. Stop after assessing record completeness, coding agreement, and whether at least one actor-specific and one structure-specific link are discriminable; do not estimate effect size or change practice.","observable_state":"A club's end-of-season presentation attributes the first team's change in time-loss hamstring-injury burden to the head of performance's named monitoring protocol. The underlying record contains athlete-level monitoring signals, staff recommendations, coach overrides, clinical decisions, training exposures, fixture and travel conditions, and injury dates, but the presentation does not distinguish the leader's choices from positional authority, inherited infrastructure, staff execution, athlete reporting, or concurrent structural changes.","prior_art_status":"UNSEARCHED","problem":"A professional club cannot tell whether a season-level change in hamstring-injury burden should be causally attributed to the head of performance's decisions, to the authority and information attached to that position, to clinicians, coaches, and athletes who implemented or resisted recommendations, or to schedule, roster, and infrastructure changes. The leader-centered account and an opposing structure-only account therefore support unreliable protocol learning and invite responsibility overreach.","proposal_index":1,"remaining_contrastive_claim":"Compared with prediction, appraisal, clinical audit, narrative audit, and simple before-and-after comparison, this review's testable distinction is whether an evidenced leader contribution survives both a plausible occupant substitution and bounded changes to the organizational and training constraints while distributed implementation remains in the causal chain.","revision_record":{"claim_changes":[],"conceptual_changes":[],"evidence_changes":[],"operational_changes":[],"parent_version":null,"progress_targets_addressed":["Translate agency–structure attribution into a concrete sport-science problem","Preserve focal-actor, distributed-actor, structural-condition, timing, and narrative asymmetry elements","Specify paired actor-substitution and structural-relaxation tests","Separate causal explanation from clinical, employment, and moral authority","Bound the initial evidence step without claiming prevalence, demand, novelty, or effect size"]},"schema_version":1,"structural_mapping":[{"archetype_element":"Explanatory target, scope, and use","domain_realization":"One squad's time-loss hamstring-injury burden, one completed season versus the preceding season, used only for protocol learning."},{"archetype_element":"Focal actor and collective inventory","domain_realization":"The head of performance is focal because of formal authority and branded records; clinicians, analysts, coaches, athletes, and operations staff remain explicit contributors or opponents."},{"archetype_element":"Structural condition and path map","domain_realization":"Fixture density, travel, squad depth, prior injury, facilities, data systems, clinical rules, coaching incentives, and inherited routines define options and constraints."},{"archetype_element":"Agency contribution trace","domain_realization":"Dated interpretations, threshold choices, recommendations, coalition work, omissions, and responses are linked to implemented exposures and clinical states."},{"archetype_element":"Opportunity, constraint, and selection map","domain_realization":"Appointment criteria, executive sponsorship, data access, meeting rights, and override rules explain why the focal actor could influence training."},{"archetype_element":"Causal role and timing classification","domain_realization":"Threshold design, coordination, override, implementation, clinical execution, and symbolic ownership are classified separately at relevant season stages."},{"archetype_element":"Evidence provenance and narrative weighting","domain_realization":"Dashboards, meeting minutes, medical records, training plans, and interviews are weighted by contemporaneity, completeness, authorship, and missing perspectives."},{"archetype_element":"Actor and structural counterfactuals","domain_realization":"A qualified alternate occupant, focal-actor absence or delay, and changed schedule, resources, information, or authority are tested within declared plausibility bounds."},{"archetype_element":"Cross-scale reconciliation","domain_realization":"Athlete-level decisions and clinical episodes are aligned with team training blocks and the season aggregate without assuming either scale is decisive."},{"archetype_element":"Responsibility and review boundary","domain_realization":"The synthesis reports conditional contribution and uncertainty; new records, changed injury definitions, or proposed personnel use trigger independent review."}],"title":"Conditional Performance Contribution Review for Hamstring-Injury Attribution","version":0}