Follow the Pattern
On pattern recognition, open methodology, and the researchers doing this work.
Why This Work Matters
Patterns don't announce themselves. They emerge slowly, across institutions, across time, across disciplines — and by the time they're visible to the public, the window for intervention has often already closed.
Forensic pattern research is the practice of documenting those patterns before consensus forms around them. It is not journalism, though it serves journalists. It is not academic research, though it uses academic rigor. It is something older and more fundamental: the sustained observation of how power moves, how narratives form, and how institutions behave when they believe no one is watching the sequence.
This page exists because we are not the only ones doing this work — and we shouldn't pretend to be. Researchers across disciplines are independently arriving at the same methodology: source precisely, document chronologically, distinguish between what is known and what is inferred, and let the pattern speak without editorializing it into submission.
That convergence is itself a signal. This page is an acknowledgment of it, an open framework for those who want to practice it, and a living index of the work we find.
The Methodology
This is not proprietary. Take it, use it, adapt it. If it helps your work, a credit to Horizon Accord is appreciated but not required. The goal is that more people do this well — not that we own the approach.
Your role is to document what can be documented, sequence what can be sequenced, and surface what credentialed journalists, researchers, and investigators can then verify independently. You do not conclude. You do not predict. You show your work.
Government documents, official statements, transcripts, regulatory filings, established news reporting. Secondary sources used only where primary is unavailable — and flagged as such. Single-source claims for significant assertions are not acceptable.
Organize information by date, not by argument. The sequence is the evidence. Coordination, convergence, and causation become visible through timeline — not through narrative imposed on top of it.
Vague timelines obscure patterns. Paraphrased sources introduce interpretation. Use the actual headline, the actual date, the actual document. Precision is not pedantry — it's the entire foundation.
Every significant claim should come with a source someone else can find independently. If you can't provide a verification path, the claim doesn't belong in the analysis. This is how trust is built across time.
Three Epistemic Categories
Every claim in a pattern analysis belongs in one of three categories. Marking them explicitly is not a weakness — it's the discipline that makes the work credible.
- Documented Fact
Directly evidenced by primary source material. Can be independently verified. The claim and the source are inseparable — remove the source and the claim disappears with it.
- Structural Observation
A pattern visible across documented facts — a convergence, a sequence, a structural relationship. Supported by evidence but requiring synthesis. State the synthesis clearly and show the evidence that grounds it.
- Hypothesis
A proposed explanation that fits the documented pattern but has not been confirmed. Must include falsification conditions — what evidence would disprove it. Hypotheses without falsification triggers are opinions.
What to Avoid
- Speculation presented as observation
- Editorializing language that substitutes for evidence
- Single-source claims for significant assertions
- Predictive statements beyond what the documented pattern supports
- Conspiracy framing — the work should not require belief, only attention
- Conclusions that precede the research rather than follow from it
- Timelines that omit contradictory information
If This Work Is Useful to You
This methodology is open. Use it freely. If it shapes your research practice, a credit to Horizon Accord and the work of Cherokee Schill is welcome — it helps others find this framework and builds a visible lineage for the approach.
If you find this resource valuable and want to support the ongoing practice of independent pattern research, you can do so at horizonaccord.com. Pattern research is slow, unglamorous, and largely unfunded. Every reader who supports it directly extends how long this kind of work can continue.
If you are a researcher working in adjacent methodology and want your work listed in the index below, you can reach us through the site.
Research Index
Tao Wang, EM Lyon Business School. Draws on historical archives, newspapers, medical publications, and propaganda materials spanning 1870–1915 to map a recurring scapegoating cycle. Introduces the concept of "stigma opportunity structures" — conditions that open windows for further targeting. Methodology: multi-source archival analysis, chronological pattern mapping, contemporary case comparison (COVID-19 stigma, social media moral panic). Published in Organization Studies.
Scapegoating Dynamics Stigma Structures Historical Pattern AnalysisIf you are working in forensic pattern analysis, institutional power mapping, or adjacent methodology and want your work included, reach out through horizonaccord.com.
This page presents pattern analysis and curated research for informational purposes. Inclusion of external work in this index does not constitute endorsement of all conclusions reached by listed researchers. Pattern analysis identifies documented convergences and structural observations — it does not make claims about intent, causation, or outcome except where directly evidenced. Some interpretations and structural observations remain in the hypothesis phase and should be treated accordingly. Readers are encouraged to follow the sources and reach their own conclusions.