What you will learn
- Reproduction instructions
- Reviewer questions
- Change log
- Decision and follow-up evidence
Reproduction instructions
Reproduction instructions should specify data versions, code or formulas, configuration and the sequence of steps. A reviewer should not have to guess a hidden parameter to obtain the reported result.
Reviewer questions
Reviewer questions should focus on material assumptions and discrepancies. Distinguish a request for clarity from a demonstrated error. Resolve disagreements with evidence and an explicit change record.
Change log
A change log states what changed, why and which outputs were affected. Preserve the prior result when useful for understanding the correction. Silent revisions make it difficult to assess whether a conclusion was selected retrospectively.
Decision and follow-up evidence
The final decision should name the action justified by the evidence and the follow-up needed. Continue research, reject the hypothesis and retain a baseline are valid outcomes; the memo need not end with a trade recommendation.
Worked example
A reviewer reproduces a different net result because the original report omitted financing. The correction should update the calculation and conclusion, not merely add a footnote while retaining the old headline.
Try it yourself
Write a correction note containing the error, affected outputs, revised conclusion and a check that prevents recurrence.
Show the worked solution
Name the omitted financing, reconcile the revised net result, reassess the decision and add an accounting check covering that cost. Preserve enough history to show why the original conclusion changed.
Apply this to your course project
Submit a concise research memo with evidence, assumptions and a rejection case.
Keep the calculation inputs, assumptions and decisions with your work. Practical exercises are self-reviewed; the scored knowledge checks assess the questions shown, not an independent certification of practical competence.