What’s Missing? Find Gaps, Unsaid Assumptions & Alternatives

The Types of Missing Context

Every article is a choice about what to include and what to leave out. Word limits force exclusion. Deadlines prevent depth. Sometimes the omissions are innocent; sometimes they shape your conclusions. Understanding what is missing from this article is as important as understanding what’s there.

Missing context comes in predictable categories:

Historical context: What happened before this? Many articles present situations as if they emerged fully formed. A policy debate makes more sense when you know what was tried before and why it failed.

Stakeholder perspectives: Who’s affected but not quoted? Articles about education policy might interview administrators and politicians but not teachers or students. Every absent voice is a potential gap.

Alternative explanations: What else could explain this? If an article claims X causes Y, what other factors might be involved? Correlation-as-causation errors hide in missing alternatives.

Counterarguments: What would critics say? Strong arguments anticipate objections. Weak arguments pretend objections don’t exist.

Conflicting data: Does other evidence point differently? Articles often cite studies that support their angle. But research landscapes are messy.

How the Prompts Work Together

PR013 (Read Between the Lines) and PR020 (Assumption Hunter) approach gaps from different angles. Use both for a complete analysis.

PR013 surfaces subtext — what the author is really saying beneath the surface. It identifies the author’s unstated attitude, the audience the piece assumes, what’s being downplayed, and what a skeptical reader would notice.

PR020 excavates foundations — what you must already believe for the argument to work. It separates presented evidence from assumed evidence, identifies alternative explanations the author ignores, and predicts which readers will find the argument convincing versus unconvincing.

Start with PR013 to understand tone and subtext. Follow with PR020 to stress-test the logical structure. Together, they create a comprehensive gap analysis.

Follow-Up: What to Do with Gaps

Prioritize by impact. Not all gaps matter equally. A missing stakeholder perspective might be interesting but not change the core argument. A missing alternative explanation might completely undermine it. Ask: if I knew this, would it change my conclusion?

Research strategically. Once you’ve identified gaps, you have a reading list. Look for articles that cover the missing perspectives, cite the conflicting studies, or address the counterarguments.

Adjust confidence accordingly. Articles with major gaps shouldn’t be dismissed — but your confidence in their conclusions should decrease.

When to Use Gap Analysis

Persuasive writing: Opinion pieces, editorials, advocacy content, and marketing materials all try to shape your view. They have the strongest incentive to omit inconvenient information.

News analysis: Unlike straight news reporting, analysis pieces interpret events. The interpretation depends on what context is included or excluded.

Policy arguments: Policy debates involve tradeoffs. Articles often emphasize benefits while downplaying costs — or vice versa.

High-stakes decisions: If you’ll act on information, verify it’s complete enough to support that action.

Continue to the final guide in this pillar: The Assumption Hunter (C045) for a deep dive into finding and classifying hidden premises. Explore all tools in the Critical Reading pillar.