C1 · Model: structuring
Turn the categories into a structure
C1 asks whether the coding scheme still makes sense after use across the collection. It repairs documented weaknesses, then begins grouping descriptive categories into broader ideas about organizing.
Where this stage starts
B4 supplies settled placements and their disagreements. The aggregator also has the pilot results, categories that readers often combined, and themes left unplaced. This provides evidence about where the scheme worked and where its boundaries obscured the material.
What the aggregator does
The aggregator revisits troublesome categories and a seeded sample of placements. It can split a category that combines different actions, merge categories that lack a useful distinction, add a missing category, or retire one that does no work. Each change needs a reason and a record of the affected material. A split requires rereading: the old label alone cannot determine which new category an item belongs to.
Multiple placements need particular care. An act may genuinely perform two functions, or the categories may be poorly separated. Reader confidence does not settle which explanation is right. Nor should the scheme be changed merely to make readers agree with its author.
The aggregator also returns directly to concepts and participant language. It looks at how turns are formed and sequenced, how ways of speaking vary, and what participants appear to take for granted. This pass can reveal patterns hidden by earlier labels.
Finally, C1 groups the descriptive, third-order themes into fourth-order themes: broader constructs that explain what several categories have in common. These groups need an argument and boundaries, not just a larger label. Their number is not fixed in advance. The stage also distinguishes ideas borrowed from existing work from those adapted or named here.
What the next stage receives
C2 receives a revised coding structure and a complete, reconciled placement record. It can ask how these parts relate in an explanation of organizing. C1 supplies the parts and their grouping; it has not yet established a model of how they work together.
What the output files contain
Open a file group for its purpose. These are descriptions of the stage’s outputs. Markdown files hold prose; JSONL files hold one structured record per line.
The revised rulesscheme_v2.md, scheme_v2.jsonl
scheme_v2.md explains the revised scheme;
scheme_v2.jsonl records it for tools. These are complete
versions, so later stages need not reconstruct the rules from scattered
edits.
Every placement, with the changes kept separateassignments_final.jsonl, assignments_final.count.txt, assign_revisions_only.jsonl
assignments_final.jsonl contains the full placement
record. assignments_final.count.txt records its reconciled
count. assign_revisions_only.jsonl lists just the changes,
allowing a reviewer to see what C1 altered without mistaking that subset
for the whole collection.
The broader themesfourth/fourth.jsonl, fourth.md
fourth/fourth.jsonl records the fourth-order groups and
their members. fourth.md explains why those groups belong
together and what they mean. Group membership alone is not an
explanation.
What a direct reading of language revealedform_pass-C1.md
form_pass-C1.md records observations about turn
structure, language and assumptions that the earlier category labels
might conceal.
Reasons and the next steptier_history.jsonl, notes-C1.md, handback-C1.md
tier_history.jsonl records changes across levels of the
scheme. notes-C1.md explains choices and unresolved issues.
handback-C1.md tells the next stage what changed, what was
checked and what still needs judgment.
Full stage description
Read the complete technical card for exact tasks, reading boundaries, checks and closing rules. The explanation above is a guide; the card holds the instructions.
How the stage is divided into legs
C1a: pass. Repeats: yes. Interview point: end.
Source versions and hashes identify the exact technical documents reproduced here.