Evidence index · record

Status: Six named release-source checks and their current dispositions. Source SHA-256 5a0769de5086994e73360fe2cb493a7b4065b189be13b38db0a359933b2df216.

Source and Citation Closure Log

Prepared: 2026-08-15
Task: Publication Transition Task 5
Scope: every source/citation flag disclosed as open by the first-book checking page, the live verification register, the three outside readings, the canonical procedural manuscript, and current publication records.

Inventory and dispositions

ID	Disclosed flag	Original locus	Best available source/locator	Disposition	Affected release text	Independent route
S01	Commentary page-check: whether the near-enemy/“masquerading” image belonged to Buddhaghosa's main text or a translator footnote	RevH open-items paragraph; register GC-4	Visuddhimagga IX.98, Ñāṇamoli translation/commentary apparatus; register GC-4 and Supplement 9	CLOSED — translator commentary footnote, not main text	Current render carries only the bounded “near enemy” paraphrase and no source-name/verbatim-footnote claim	Initial locating route plus 2026-08-05 render recheck, recorded in register Supplement 9
S02	Locator click-audit row 8: SY10 “Masuda 2004” identity mismatch	RevH “two rows”; register Supplement 6 row 8	PMID `14998740`; DOI `10.1016/j.brat.2003.10.008`; comparison PMID `11708567`	CLOSED — recorded PMID is Akihiko Masuda et al. 2004 cognitive-defusion paper; audit-sheet Masuda & Nisbett gloss was the erroneous embellishment	Method record corrected; current render contains none of the names or apparatus	Independent primary checks recorded in Supplement 9
S03	Locator click-audit row 1: IV9 Webster subjective-effort watch-for absent from abstract	RevH “two rows”; register Supplement 6 row 1	Webster et al. 2022, International Journal of Psychophysiology 177:122–132; DOI `10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2022.05.003`; PMID `35568270`; open author full text	CLOSED — full text reports greater retrospective subjective effort while physiological/preparatory measures support the narrower “relatively effortless” account	Current render already distinguishes physiological index from subjective effort; no wording change required	Independent primary/full-text check recorded in Supplement 9
S04	Second literature search for the Image chapter's reader-authored sentence move	RevH open-items paragraph; reader-value/trust outside readings	Powell et al. 2015 DOI `10.1111/jcom.12184`; Phillips 2000 DOI `10.1080/00913367.2000.10673600`; Lin et al. 2023 DOI `10.1038/s41598-023-28230-x`; Bünzli & Dillard 2022 DOI `10.1080/1051144X.2022.2053817`; Jeong 2008 DOI `10.1080/14697010701717488`	CLOSED FOR THE RELEASE CLAIM — second search performed; four direct-test records primary-checked; Jeong mechanism not used; none tests the reader-authored move in naturalistic settings	Current render states two searches and limits the negative to the reader-authored move; it makes no Jeong mechanism claim	Narrow-net seat plus separate primary-check routes recorded in Supplements 7–8
S05	al-Qushayrī source hold: khawf and taqwā glosses	Register Supplements 4–5; RevH historical disclosure	Knysh translation, printed pp. 125 and 142–143, sight-read from the Knysh-pagination PDF	CLOSED — khawf supported in substance; prior taqwā “settled watchfulness” wording not supported and replaced with guarding-through-obedience wording	Current render line 166 carries the corrected bounded gloss	Render repair and source-sight-check lineage in Supplements 4–5; later render audit records the repair present
S06	Three Ground quote checks: Bowlby, Fee, Thiselton/Gilbrant conflation	Register GC-2/GC-5 and Supplements 1–3	Bowlby, A Secure Base, Basic 1988 p.151 / Routledge p.172; Fee, NICNT 1987 p.628; Thiselton attribution unsubstantiated, positive conflation route to Gilbrant	CLOSED — two printed-page checks; unsupported Thiselton attribution struck after three unsuccessful verification paths	Reader prose carries no author names or unsupported quotation	Human sight-check and independent source-path records in Supplements 1–3

Historical material that remains unchanged

The three outside readings remain verbatim. Their descriptions of open items are evidence of what those seats saw, not the current task status.
The original body of language_of_fear_BACKMATTER_how_this_book_was_checked_DRAFT_RevH_2026-08-04.md remains intact and now begins with a dated correction pointer to this log.
Earlier OPEN, [verify], PENDING, and failed-audit language remains inside the chronological verification register as provenance; later supplements supply the correction path.
Jeong's paywalled mechanism remains unverified and is deliberately excluded from the release claim. A source not used for a claim is not silently upgraded.

Current-source corrections

products/language_of_fear/book/language_of_fear_PUBLIC_RENDER_DRAFT_ground-strip.md now replaces its stale “one check remains open” and “not yet closed” paragraphs with a dated-status account of what closed after the first edition. The canonical procedural manuscript required no source correction: it contains no citation apparatus, [verify] marker, or open-source disclosure.

Final probes

The release-source probe covers:

The_Warning_Exchange_BOOK_RevB_2026-08-14.md;
language_of_fear_PUBLIC_RENDER_DRAFT_ground-strip.md;
language_of_fear_report_SOURCE.md (its report-reference check continues as Task 12, but it contains no named unresolved citation flag); and
current RevB worksheet/package/condition records, excluding quoted historical outside-reading text.

PASS requires zero occurrences in current release sources of:

[verify];
one check remains open;
page-check is outstanding;
two rows ... remain open;
queued and not yet run; or
SOURCE-HOLD ... remains OPEN.

The separate standing research question about a form-only minimal-pair study is not a citation defect; the report explicitly presents it as an open empirical question and makes no current causal claim from it.

Open the exact raw Markdown source (6,105 bytes; SHA-256 5a0769de5086994e73360fe2cb493a7b4065b189be13b38db0a359933b2df216).