EvoClaw Alternative Hypothesis Check
Discipline layer skill. Active during Phase 4–5 for Type D and Type H projects.
Iron Law
NO MECHANISM CLAIMS WITHOUT EXCLUDING ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS
Systematic Check
For each major finding, systematically check:
- □ Confounders — variables that could explain the association independently of your proposed mechanism
- □ Batch effects [bioinformatics] — technical variation masquerading as biology (plate, lane, date, operator)
- □ Technical noise — measurement artifacts, instrument drift, reagent lot differences
- □ Sample selection bias — non-random inclusion criteria that correlate with the outcome
- □ Multiple testing inflation — testing many hypotheses means some will be significant by chance; confirm FDR/Bonferroni was applied
- □ Correlation ≠ causation — temporal precedence, dose-response, and intervention evidence must be present before causal language is used
When an Alternative Explanation Cannot Be Excluded
If an alternative explanation cannot be excluded:
→ It must be stated as a limitation in the paper → Language must be weakened ("associated with" not "causes") → It cannot be presented as a mechanistic finding
Checklist Format
For each finding, produce a table:
| Finding | Alternative checked | Excluded? | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | Confounder X | Yes / No | ... |
Rationalization Firewall
| You will hear yourself say... | Reality check |
|---|---|
| "The effect is too strong to be confounding" | Strong effects can still be confounded. Check anyway. |
| "We controlled for the obvious variables" | Obvious to you. What about reviewer #2's favorite confounder? |
| "Correlation is enough for this paper" | Correlation is enough only if you DON'T claim mechanism. |
| "Batch correction was applied" | Did you verify it worked? Show before/after. |