Reality Audit · specialisations

Audit Types

The audit types use the same methodological foundation while directing examination toward different kinds of frames, claims, documentation, and practice.

1

Function and purpose

An audit type is not an independent theory. It is a specialisation of Reality Audit defining what is examined, which distinctions are decisive, what documentation is required, and which error or capture patterns may be relevant.

Every audit type must follow the same foundational rule: the conclusion must not be built into the mandate. Language Audit must not presuppose language capture, Identity Audit must not presuppose identity capture, and Model Audit must not presuppose that the model is false or misleading.

Selecting an audit type does not reduce a matter to one dimension. A concrete case may require several interacting audit types, but each finding must still be tied to the object and grounds it actually concerns.

2

Common structure

Each audit type is built on the same operational spine. This makes findings comparable without making different audit objects artificially identical.

Specialisation occurs in the questions, sources, characteristic failure modes, and thresholds for particular risk assessments—not by suspending the Standard's requirements of traceability, contradiction, and proportionality.

  1. S1

    Object and mandate

    Defines which relation, claim, frame, practice, or decision is being examined and what falls outside the inquiry.

  2. S2

    Decisive distinctions

    Identifies concepts that must remain distinct, such as self and identity, model and actuality, or authority and grounds.

  3. S3

    Grounds and counter-material

    Defines the sources, observations, documents, actions, and alternative explanations relevant to the audit.

  4. S4

    Audit questions

    Translates the Standard into concrete questions for the audit type without predetermining the answer.

  5. S5

    Findings and confidence

    Classifies what is supported, partly supported, unresolved, insufficient, erroneous, or connected to capture risk.

  6. S6

    Correction and review

    Links a bounded finding to the least intrusive defensible change and a visible test of its effect.

3

Audit-type register

The register presents the planned family of audit types. Only documents published in the new structure are linked as current working documents.

Status concerns the document, not the importance of the subject or whether earlier working material exists.

A1

Language Audit

Object of audit
Words, definitions, claims, references, categorisation, and linguistic frames.
Central question
Do expressions answer to what they are used about, and is the distinction among observation, interpretation, and conclusion kept visible?
Possible capture risk
Language or definition may gain governing priority over what it was meant to refer to.
A2

Identity Audit

Object of audit
The relation among self, name, attribute, category, role, membership, attribution, and action.
Central question
Does identity serve bounded orientation, or are the person and their actions reduced to the identity frame?
Possible capture risk
Identity may take governing possession of self-understanding, interpretation, loyalty, or treatment of the person.
A3

Model Audit

Object of audit
Model grounds, assumptions, transformation, measurement, prediction, loss, and assignment to actuality.
Central question
What does the model do, what is it built upon, and what ontological content is assigned beyond what the grounds can bear?
Possible capture risk
The model may be used as though it were the modelled object itself and protected from corrective observation.
A4

Representation Audit

Object of audit
Image, text, diagram, map, symbol, narrative, recording, and other representations.
Central question
What is represented, what is selected or omitted, and what can the representation actually document?
Possible capture risk
The representation may receive the status of the event, object, or whole itself without adequate traceability.
A5

System and Institutional Audit

Object of audit
Rules, procedures, registers, incentives, responsibility lines, decision paths, and institutional practice.
Central question
Does the system serve its purpose and the documented matter, or protect its own account and operation against relevant correction?
Possible capture risk
Procedure or institution may make its own categories and self-protection govern the matter and the persons concerned.
A6

Authority Audit

Object of audit
Competence, mandate, role, decision power, source use, and demands for trust or obedience.
Central question
What grounds support the authority claim, what may the authority actually decide, and how can the decision be reviewed?
Possible capture risk
Role or status may replace documented grounds and turn contradiction into disobedience rather than relevant examination.
A7

Practice Audit

Object of audit
The relation among stated knowledge, norm, responsibility, action, consequence, and corrective follow-up.
Central question
Does action answer to what is stated, documented, and undertaken, and is its effect examined?
Possible capture risk
Routine, target, role, or self-presentation may continue even where the effect no longer answers to the purpose.
4

Boundaries and overlap

Audit types overlap because language, identity, models, representations, systems, and authority operate together. Overlap must not be resolved by treating every audit as the same audit.

The decisive type is the one that best answers to the concrete question and the finding to be supported. Other types may be used as supporting or separate sub-audits.

Boundaries and overlap
Audit AAudit BDecisive distinction
Language AuditRepresentation AuditLanguage Audit primarily tests concepts, reference, and claim; Representation Audit tests selection, form, medium, and the relation between the representation and the represented matter.
Identity AuditRole or Authority AuditIdentity Audit tests reduction of person or self to category; Role and Authority Audit tests mandate, function, competence, and decision power.
Model AuditSystem AuditModel Audit tests representation, assumption, and assignment; System Audit tests operative rules, incentives, responsibility, and institutional corrigibility.
Authority AuditPractice AuditAuthority Audit tests the right and grounds to speak or decide; Practice Audit tests whether action and effect answer to claim, responsibility, and purpose.
5

Capture risk as a possible finding

Each audit type has its own risk pattern, but none has capture as a foregone conclusion. A frame may be necessary, useful, and open to correction without being capturing.

Capture risk should be recorded only where concrete indications show that the frame may be beginning to govern what may count as grounds. Capture identified requires the stricter threshold in the Capture Risk document.

6

Publication programme

The overview and Identity Audit are published first to establish the common document form and demonstrate how an earlier capture page is rebuilt as a complete audit type.

The remaining documents will be published only when their concepts, evidential requirements, finding thresholds, and correction rules are aligned with the Standard and operational Procedure.

  • Each audit type must be usable without presupposing blame, error, or capture.
  • Each type must distinguish the object of audit, person, role, claim, action, and consequence as far as the matter permits.
  • Each type must show which documentation may strengthen, weaken, or alter a provisional finding.
  • Each type must carry forward F1–F7 and C0–C6 rather than creating incompatible judgment systems.
  • Each type must include a dedicated section on limitation, misuse, and the risk that the audit itself becomes capturing.