negative-case-finder

Classifies contradictions to qualitative propositions into four negative case types with revision guidance.

265|23|Updated Feb 7, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/yipng05-max/-skills --skill negative-case-finder-yipng05-max
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: negative-case-finder
Source: https://github.com/yipng05-max/-skills/tree/main/negative-case-finder
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/yipng05-max/-skills --skill negative-case-finder-yipng05-max

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Helps researchers systematically identify cases that contradict a tentative qualitative claim, so the claim can be refined with clear boundary and mechanism adjustments instead of generic “opposing opinions.”

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Negative case classification (4 types): distinguishes genuine disconfirming cases, boundary cases, dimensional variations, and insufficient-data situations, each with a tailored revision direction.
  • Proposition-first targeting: parses the proposition’s conditions, mechanism, and falsification points before searching for contradictions, improving precision over vague disagreement hunting.
  • Guided proposition revision pipeline: produces structured outputs that culminate in concrete revision paths and a proposed revised proposition draft when applicable.
  • Best fit use cases: testing early-stage or mid-stage propositions in grounded-theory-style work, when you have coded materials or excerpts and want to strengthen explanatory scope and validity.

Quick Start

Tell the skill your one-sentence tentative proposition and paste the supporting coded excerpts or memo, then ask it to conduct negative case analysis and propose revision directions.

Frequently Asked Questions about negative-case-finder

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
What is negative case analysis in qualitative research?▼

Negative case analysis identifies cases that contradict a tentative qualitative proposition to refine its boundary conditions and mechanisms. It systematically classifies disconfirming evidence to strengthen a claim's explanatory scope and validity.

How do I find disconfirming cases to refine a grounded theory proposition?▼

To find disconfirming cases, parse your proposition's conditional range and mechanisms, then compare them against coded excerpts. Classify contradictions into genuine disconfirming, boundary, dimensional, or insufficient-data types to generate structured revision guidance.

Can I use negative case analysis for mid-stage proposition testing with coded memos?▼

Yes, negative case analysis suits mid-stage proposition testing when you have coded materials or memos. It processes these inputs to categorize contradictions and outputs concrete revision paths and a proposed revised proposition draft.

What is the best way to distinguish boundary cases from genuine disconfirming cases?▼

The best way to distinguish boundary cases from genuine disconfirming cases is through proposition-first targeting. This method parses the claim's conditions and falsification points to classify contradictions and provide tailored revision directions.

Does negative case analysis work for early-stage coding in qualitative research?▼

Negative case analysis applies to early-stage coding by testing tentative propositions with initial coded materials. It helps strengthen explanatory scope by identifying boundary variations and insufficient-data situations early in the theoretical construction process.