R5
Capture Risk and Capture Findings
Capture is not the premise of the audit. It is a bounded risk pattern and a possible finding when a frame takes governing priority over what it was meant to serve.
Abstract
This document distinguishes frame use, error, bias, capture risk, and capture identified. It establishes thresholds for findings F6 and F7 and specifies what must be documented before capture can be used as an audit finding.
Its purpose is both to make actual capture visible and to prevent the term from becoming a loose accusation, identity label, or substitute for documentation.
Definition and basic limitation
A frame is necessary in language, analysis, modelling, institution, and action. Capture therefore does not arise merely because a frame exists. The question is what the frame does, what it replaces, and whether it remains correctable by what it refers to.
Distinguishing frame, error, and capture
The following concepts must remain distinct. Otherwise ordinary interpretation or human error may be inflated into a more serious systemic condition.
| Condition | Characteristic | Relation to correction |
|---|---|---|
| Frame | Orders, bounds, or represents a subject | Open to testing and revision |
| Error | An element does not correspond to the grounds | May be corrected without protecting the frame |
| Bias | Systematic weighting or selection affects the account | May be conscious or unconscious; requires counter-testing |
| Capture risk (F6) | The frame begins to govern what may count, but all conditions are not documented | Requires opening, safeguards, and reassessment |
| Capture identified (F7) | The frame replaces the reference and resists relevant correction | Requires the governing effect to be bounded or suspended |
Threshold for F6 — capture risk
F6 is used where concrete risk indicators exist but the material does not support a complete capture finding. The category keeps the question open without making the risk invisible.
Restricted access to counter-material
Relevant sources, experiences, or objections are systematically filtered, delayed, or treated as irrelevant without visible grounds.
- Consequence
- Register what is missing and open the matter to independent counter-testing.
Category before matter
Identity, role, model, or institutional category determines in advance how the material may be interpreted.
- Consequence
- Separate the category from the concrete matter and test alternative classifications.
Correction is transformed
Relevant criticism is answered by redefinition, subject-switching, or status claims rather than testing the content.
- Consequence
- Return the criticism to the bounded claim element.
Asymmetric evidential demand
The frame's own claims are allowed to stand on weaker grounds than counterclaims or corrective material.
- Consequence
- Equalize evidential demands and document the asymmetry.
Threshold for F7 — capture identified
F7 requires a continuous chain of documentation. It is not enough to show that the frame is strong, that an actor is mistaken, or that correction is difficult.
The frame is identified
It is clear which concept, identity, model, procedure, authority, or institutional arrangement acts as the governing frame.
- Minimum basis
- Concrete wording, rules, practices, decision paths, or patterns.
The substitution is identified
It is clear what the frame is allowed to replace: the self, observation, source, the model's object, actual responsibility, or effect.
- Minimum basis
- A traceable difference between what is referred to and what the frame requires to count.
Governing priority is documented
The frame determines which material, language, or response may have effect even when relevant grounds point toward correction.
- Minimum basis
- Decisions or practices that follow the frame rather than documented grounds.
Resistance to relevant correction
Correction is rejected, redefined, concealed, sanctioned, or made procedurally inaccessible to preserve the frame.
- Minimum basis
- Documented corrective attempts and traceable responses.
Relevant consequence
The capture has a demonstrable effect on knowledge, self-relation, decision, responsibility, right, practice, or access to actuality.
- Minimum basis
- A bounded harm, misdirection, exclusion, or governing effect.
Capture forms within audit types
Capture forms are risk patterns within the audit types. They are not separate methods and must not replace the broader examination.
| Audit type | Possible capture form | What may be replaced |
|---|---|---|
| Language Audit | Language capture | Reference becomes subordinate to wording, definition, or rhetorical frame |
| Identity Audit | Identity capture | The self and action become subordinate to name, category, or membership |
| Model Audit | Model capture | The model is treated as though it were the actuality it represents |
| Representation Audit | Representation capture | Image, narrative, or data display replaces what is represented |
| System Audit | System capture | Procedure or institution protects its operation against actual effect and responsibility |
| Authority Audit | Authority capture | Status or position replaces traceable grounds and responsibility |
| Practice Audit | Practice capture | Habit, role, or procedure continues when actual effect requires change |
Indicators that are not proof by themselves
Several features may justify inquiry without being sufficient for a capture finding. This limitation is necessary to protect the method against overuse.
- Strong agreement or strong disagreement.
- Use of technical concepts, categories, or models.
- The existence of institutional rules or hierarchy.
- A person defending their own interpretation.
- Correction taking time or requiring procedure.
- A claim turning out to be false.
- A decision having negative consequences.
- Conflict between auditor and audited party.
Documentation requirements
A capture-risk assessment must be reviewable by someone who does not share the auditor's interpretation. It must therefore rest on more than summary and motive attribution.
- Bounded audit object and claim element.
- Identified frame and function.
- What the frame may have replaced.
- Sources, actions, processes, or decisions showing the governing mechanism.
- Relevant counter-material and alternative explanations.
- Corrective attempts and responses to them.
- Consequence, uncertainty, and limitation.
- Reason for F6 or F7 rather than adjacent categories.
Response, safeguards, and review
The response should first reduce the risk of further misdirection and restore access to the grounds. It should not automatically target person, identity, or motive.
- Make sources, counter-material, and decision grounds accessible.
- Separate roles, interests, and decision power.
- Temporarily suspend irreversible or harmful effects where the grounds support it.
- Open the matter to independent testing and contradiction.
- Alter the governing frame only to the degree required by the finding.
- Specify what will demonstrate that the capture risk has been reduced.
Grounds and references
Revision history
- Document version
- 1.0
- First published
- 18 June 2026
First public edition.