From records to claims: a model of documentary transformation and evidential accountability

Purpose This article examines how records are represented as support for documentary claims. It asks what claim-centred appraisal adds to established approaches to records, provenance and argument when different claims rely on the same record complex but make different evidential and corrective demands. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on archival record theory, document theory, cognitive authority, social epistemology, argumentation, provenance and paradata, the article develops a conceptual model. A hypothetical comparison of three claims derived from one record complex illustrates its use and identifies possible empirical tests. Findings The claim–record configuration joins an assertion to its cited records, transformation history, warrant, backing, responsible roles and derivative versions. The model distinguishes three constitutive operations, two regulatory operations and six accountability relations in three domains. Six propositions concern reconstruction, claim–support fit, claim-type differences, attribution, mediation and correction after reuse. Originality/value The versioned claim provides a common unit for examining documentary support, inferential judgment and subsequent repair. The framework distinguishes inspectable claim–record relations from warrant adequacy, allowing claims drawn from the same records to receive different assessments and correction responses. Six propositions enable comparison with established integrated professional practice.