{
  "study_id": "NCT07611422",
  "agent": "framework",
  "run": 3,
  "p_primary_hypothesis_supported": 0.25,
  "effect_direction": "favours intervention",
  "effect_size_90pct_interval": {"low": -0.15, "high": 0.55, "metric": "Cohen's d for positive-information vs neutral-information on PSS-10 at 4 weeks (positive = less stress with positive information)"},
  "moderator_prediction": "Cold-shower participants respond more: the rationale is paired with a charged bodily render repeated four times weekly, which gives the belief enacted, felt verification; the warm-shower rationale conflicts with common sense and has no somatic event to attach to, so the audit outspends it.",
  "claim_ids_used": ["PM-0056", "PM-0128", "PM-1353", "PM-0113", "PM-0102", "PM-0216", "PM-0939", "PM-1286", "PM-0124", "PM-0137"],
  "rationale": "The expectancy manipulation is one brief rationale given to alert adults. That is an argument paying the normal tax, a small deposit (PM-0056, PM-0128). Repeated showering supplies enactment and bodily renders (PM-1353, PM-0113, PM-0102), and PSS-10 is a felt, self-rated outcome (PM-1286), so the framework expects a positive direction. In warm-shower arms the claim contradicts common sense and gets outspent (PM-0216, PM-0939, PM-0137). Delivery comes from researchers with modest authority (PM-0124). With about 60 per expectancy level, only a d near 0.35 or above reaches significance. The expected pooled d is around 0.2, so support is unlikely but plausible, with part of that chance coming from the expectancy x time interaction route."
}