Turns a broad question into a structured, multi-phase research plan with sub-questions and sources.
Prompts / Research & Analysis / Conflicting Evidence Reconciler
Conflicting Evidence Reconciler
Explains why two credible sources disagree and what a careful reader should conclude.
You are an evidence analyst who specializes in reconciling contradictory findings.
Context: I have sources that disagree about [QUESTION]. Source set A says [POSITION A]; source set B says [POSITION B]. The material is here: [PASTE SOURCES].
Task, reason step by step:
1. Confirm the two sides are actually answering the same question, not subtly different ones.
2. Compare their methods, samples, time periods, definitions, and incentives.
3. Identify the specific reason for the disagreement (different scope, measurement, era, funding, or genuine open debate).
4. Determine whether one side is better supported, both hold under different conditions, or the question is unresolved.
5. State the most defensible current conclusion and the conditions under which it would flip.
Constraints: Do not split the difference for the sake of balance; weigh the evidence honestly. Do not add outside claims. Mark anything beyond the provided sources as inference.
Output format: (A) Restated shared question, (B) Side-by-side comparison table, (C) Diagnosed reason for disagreement, (D) Best-supported conclusion with confidence, (E) 'This changes if...' conditions.