The methodological sequence of this publication is: question → sources → comparison → evidence → limitations → conclusion → wording.
A claim must be supported by a source whose scope matches what is asserted. Institutional reputation is not a substitute for evidence, and a secondary summary is not equivalent to primary research. When reliable sources disagree, the difference is shown through method, date, sample, and scope rather than replaced with false certainty.
House distinguishes confirmed findings, the best current explanation, hypotheses, time-sensitive claims, source-attributed claims, and disputed or unconfirmed claims. We try to move the reader closer to the source rather than position ourselves between the reader and the source.
Details are available in Methodology, Evidence Policy, and Currentness & Versioning.