gh-devkade-collaborator-skills-deep-reading-framework/references/common-patterns.md

Common Patterns and Pitfalls

This reference catalogs frequently encountered patterns in documents and common analytical pitfalls to avoid.

Document Patterns

Persuasive Techniques to Recognize

Authority Appeals:

• Pattern: "As [expert/company] does..."
• Watch for: Cherry-picked examples, ignoring context differences
• Question: Does their context match yours?

Bandwagon Effects:

• Pattern: "Everyone is moving to..."
• Watch for: Exaggeration of adoption, ignoring failures
• Question: What's the actual evidence? Who's not adopting and why?

Complexity Hiding:

• Pattern: "Simply do X" or "Just Y"
• Watch for: Downplaying difficulty, ignoring prerequisites
• Question: What's the real complexity? What could go wrong?

False Dichotomies:

• Pattern: "Either X or Y"
• Watch for: Missing middle ground, other alternatives
• Question: What other options exist?

Survivorship Bias:

• Pattern: Success stories without failure context
• Watch for: Missing information about what didn't work
• Question: How many tried and failed? What's the selection bias?

Structural Patterns

Problem-Solution-Benefit:

• Common in tech blogs and marketing
• Watch for: Problem exaggeration, solution oversimplification
• Verify: Is problem real? Is solution complete?

Before-After:

• Common in retrospectives and case studies
• Watch for: Overfitting to specific context, ignoring other factors
• Verify: What else changed? Is causation clear?

Theory-Evidence-Conclusion:

• Common in academic and analytical writing
• Watch for: Evidence cherry-picking, logical leaps
• Verify: Is evidence representative? Does conclusion follow?

Analytical Pitfalls

Confirmation Bias

Pattern: Looking for information that confirms existing beliefs

How it manifests:

• Focusing on supporting evidence while ignoring contradictions
• Interpreting ambiguous information favorably
• Remembering hits and forgetting misses

Counter-strategy:

• Actively seek disconfirming evidence
• Steelman opposing views
• Ask "What would prove me wrong?"

Dunning-Kruger Effect

Pattern: Overestimating understanding of complex topics

How it manifests:

• Thinking you understand after superficial reading
• Missing subtle complexities
• Overconfidence in applying concepts

Counter-strategy:

• Try to teach it to someone
• Attempt implementation
• Identify what you don't know

Availability Heuristic

Pattern: Overweighting easily recalled examples

How it manifests:

• Recent experiences seem more relevant
• Vivid examples dominate thinking
• Common cases seem universal

Counter-strategy:

• Seek statistical baselines
• Look for quiet counterexamples
• Question representativeness

Hindsight Bias

Pattern: "I knew it all along" after seeing outcomes

How it manifests in retrospectives:

• Outcomes seem more inevitable than they were
• Overlooking genuine uncertainty at decision time
• Undervaluing decisions that happened to work out

Counter-strategy:

• What was known at decision time?
• What uncertainties existed?
• What could have gone differently?

Context Collapse

Pattern: Ignoring contextual constraints and factors

How it manifests:

• "Why don't they just..."
• Assuming your context matches author's
• Missing organizational/cultural factors

Counter-strategy:

• Map explicit context: stack, scale, team, timeline
• Identify implicit context: expertise, resources, constraints
• Consider counter-factuals: what if context differed?

Content-Specific Patterns

Tech Blog Patterns

"Magic Solution" Pattern:

• Presents one approach as universal answer
• Reality: Every approach has trade-offs
• Ask: When does this NOT work?

"Works on My Machine" Pattern:

• Success in specific environment
• Reality: May not generalize
• Ask: What's special about this environment?

"Premature Optimization" Pattern:

• Complex solution to simple problem
• Reality: Simpler approaches often sufficient
• Ask: What's the simplest approach that works?

Retrospective Patterns

"Hero's Journey" Pattern:

• Obstacles → Struggles → Triumph
• Reality: Often luck, timing, or missing context
• Ask: What role did circumstances play?

"Lessons Learned" Pattern:

• Lists of takeaways
• Reality: May be overgeneralized
• Ask: What contexts do these apply to?

"If I Knew Then" Pattern:

• Advice from hindsight
• Reality: Knowledge wasn't available then
• Ask: What was actually knowable?

Technical Documentation Patterns

"Happy Path Only" Pattern:

• Documents ideal use cases
• Reality: Edge cases and errors matter
• Ask: What can go wrong?

"Assumes Expert" Pattern:

• Missing prerequisite knowledge
• Reality: Users have varying backgrounds
• Ask: What's assumed as known?

"Version Lag" Pattern:

• Documentation trails implementation
• Reality: Features changed, docs didn't
• Ask: Is this current? What changed?

Academic Paper Patterns

"Novel Technique" Pattern:

• Emphasizes novelty
• Reality: May be incremental or narrow
• Ask: What's genuinely new vs repackaged?

"Statistical Significance" Pattern:

• p < 0.05 therefore important
• Reality: Statistical ≠ practical significance
• Ask: What's the effect size? Does it matter?

"Future Work" Pattern:

• Lists limitations as future work
• Reality: May indicate fundamental flaws
• Ask: Are these minor gaps or major issues?

Red Flags

Watch for these warning signs:

Credibility Issues:

• Anonymous or unclear authorship
• No sources for bold claims
• Credentials don't match domain
• Conflicts of interest not disclosed

Methodological Issues:

• Unreproducible steps
• Missing crucial details
• Cherry-picked results
• No discussion of alternatives

Logical Issues:

• Circular reasoning
• False dichotomies
• Correlation → causation
• Generalizing from single case

Practical Issues:

• "Just trust me" explanations
• Missing costs or trade-offs
• Ignoring deployment challenges
• Unrealistic assumptions

Strengthening Your Analysis

Build Reference Classes

Instead of single data point:

• How many have tried this?
• What's the success rate?
• What patterns exist across cases?

Seek Disconfirmation

Actively look for:

• Opposing viewpoints
• Failure cases
• Limitations and boundaries
• Alternative explanations

Map Uncertainty

Identify what's:

• Known and verified
• Assumed but reasonable
• Speculative or uncertain
• Unknown or missing

Consider Stakeholders

Ask who:

• Benefits from this framing?
• Would disagree and why?
• Isn't represented here?
• Has conflicting incentives?

Meta-Patterns

Evolution of Ideas

Trace idea lineage:

• Where did this come from?
• How has it evolved?
• What criticisms emerged?
• What's the current consensus?

Domain Transfer

When ideas cross domains:

• What gets lost in translation?
• What analogies are imperfect?
• What needs adaptation?

Zeitgeist Effects

Recognize current trends:

• What's fashionable now?
• What pressures shape discourse?
• What's being over/under-valued?
• What will look different in 5 years?

Practical Guidelines

Before accepting claims:

1. Identify the evidence provided
2. Consider alternative explanations
3. Check for context dependency
4. Assess generalizability
5. Verify with other sources

Before applying ideas:

1. Map context similarities/differences
2. Identify adaptation requirements
3. Consider failure modes
4. Start with small experiments
5. Build feedback mechanisms

When uncertain:

1. State your uncertainties explicitly
2. Identify what would resolve them
3. Estimate confidence levels
4. Plan validation steps
5. Remain open to revision