Classifying Contradictions

Contradictions between sources are not all the same. The resolution method depends on the contradiction type. Factual contradictions: sources disagree on a specific, verifiable datum — a number, a date, a name. One source says revenue was $45M, another says $52M. Resolution requires tracing to the primary source. Interpretive contradictions: sources agree on the facts but disagree on what the facts mean. Both acknowledge the layoffs but one frames them as restructuring and the other as decline. Both interpretations may be valid from different analytical frames. Temporal contradictions: sources report different facts because they captured the situation at different moments. Revenue was $45M in Q2 and $52M in Q4 — both are correct, separated by time. Methodological contradictions: sources arrive at different findings because they used different measurement approaches. Market share is 12% by revenue and 18% by customer count. Both are correct within their methodology.

1. Step 1: Identify the Specific Disagreement Reduce the contradiction to its atomic form. Not "Source A and Source B disagree about Company X" but "Source A reports Q3 revenue of $45M while Source B reports $52M." The specific claim, the specific values, the specific sources.
2. Step 2: Classify the Type Is this factual (one is wrong), interpretive (both are valid from different frames), temporal (both are correct at different times), or methodological (both are correct using different measures)? Classification determines resolution.
3. Step 3: Assign Severity How much does this contradiction affect your conclusions? A revenue disagreement of $45M vs. $52M may not change a competitive ranking. A market share disagreement of 5% vs. 25% changes everything. Severity determines how much resolution effort the contradiction warrants.