🌻 Path tracing and source tracing#

9 Feb 2026

Summary#

Path tracing is for answering questions like:

It’s best thought of as:

  1. a filter (keep only links that participate in the traced pathways), plus
  2. an interpretation rule (what counts as evidence for a pathway).

What you get (in plain terms)#

You choose:

Then the result is a sub-map containing only the links that sit on at least one allowed pathway.

When to use it (practitioner-friendly)#

Without source tracing, a pathway can be a composite: one source says A→X and another says X→B, so the map can show A→…→B even if no single respondent told the full chain.

Source tracing is the stricter version: it keeps only pathways that can be realised within at least one single source (a coherent within-source narrative).

Use it when you want to avoid the “stitched together across respondents” problem.

Practical tips#

Order matters (a conservative workflow)#

If you care about coherent pathways and you want a cleaner, summarised map:

Formal notes (optional)#

If you want the precise definition, here it is.

Given one or more start factors \(S\), one or more end factors \(T\), and a maximum path length \(K\):

The key is: path tracing is link-based. It should not “fill in” extra links between surviving factors.