# Claim Types in Owlery Owlery becomes more reliable when it is clear what kind of claim a note is making. Not every useful idea has the same evidence status. A source note, a practice pattern, a synthesis, a tool, and a teaching case should not pretend to carry the same weight. ## Source-grounded A source-grounded note is based directly on a named book, paper, article, talk, or documented source. Use it when the note can point to a clear origin. Hold it strongly for the core claim, and more carefully when applying it to a new context. Example areas include [[Psychological Safety]], social loafing research, decision research, and complexity sources. ## Practice-grounded A practice-grounded note comes from repeated facilitation, coaching, delivery, operating, or field experience. It is not universal law. It is a pattern worth testing because it has shown practical usefulness across situations. ## Owlery synthesis An Owlery synthesis combines source-grounded material, practice experience, and Owlery stance into a useful framing. Examples include [[Safety as Sensing Infrastructure]], [[Social Loafing as a System Signal]], and [[Meetings as Operating Infrastructure Map]]. Use these as lenses, not as labels. ## Hypothesis A hypothesis is plausible but not yet strongly evidenced in Owlery. Use it lightly. Name what evidence would strengthen or weaken it. ## Tool or practice A tool is not true or false in the same way a factual claim is. Its legitimacy comes from whether it helps people observe, frame, decide, act, and learn better in context. Examples include [[Signal Log]], [[Decision Snapshot]], and [[After Action Review]]. ## Teaching case A teaching case illustrates a pattern. It does not prove the pattern. Use field notes, stories, sport, and pop culture examples as memorable mirrors, not as evidence. ## Use with care If a note makes a strong claim, ask: - What kind of claim is this? - What supports it? - What would be overreach? - What should be tested in context? ## See Also - [[Evidence and Reliability Guide]] - [[Source Lineage Standards]] - [[Core Claims Register]] - [[Using Owlery Responsibly]] ## Counter-indicators by claim type Each claim type needs a different counter-indicator check. - Source-grounded concepts can still be misapplied outside their context. - Practice-grounded patterns may not generalise. - Owlery synthesis should not be presented as settled fact. - Tools should not be used when the group cannot act on the output. - Teaching cases should not be treated as proof. See [[Counter Indicators and Responsible Use]].