Answer the reader's checklist
Claim: a case holds a part for each of the 12 items of the reader's checklist of Runeson 2009, in a fixed order.
- Grade: convention; no study shows that meeting the checklist makes a report more trusted.
- Evidence: Runeson 2009, Tables 11 to 13; Ralph 2020; ICSE 2003. Where: baseline; state of the art, Q2.
- Check:
shape-conformance(exact): the case holds each heading of the shape, from Summary to Rerun. - Reader styles: none particular to this genre yet; the reader-ergonomics styles hold.
What it asks
- The case has the parts of the shape: summary, genre, case, why this case, data, analysis, results, chain of evidence, threats, triangulation, roles, lessons, method version and rerun.
- Each part answers an item of the checklist, met or not met with a reason.
- An item not met is named in the Threats to validity, and the case is still published.
Why
- A reader who was absent asks the same twelve questions of any report; fixed parts let the answers be found.
- Triangulation is the weak item for a report from inside, so the shape asks which sources were not independent.
Limits
- The check finds the headings, not the answers.
- The checklist assumes a researcher apart from the case; items 48 and 49 are hard from inside.