Record coding rationale when an outcome excerpt does not explain a mixed verdict

For original `10.1037/a0017094` and replication `10.1037/xge0001886`, the explorer records **mixed**, but the displayed quotation describes the interaction not being observed. The stored quotation source is the abstract. This does not establish that the mixed code is wrong: it establishes that the excerpt alone is insufficient to explain it.

Please check the full report and coding record, and add evidence for both replicated and unreplicated components or a structured coding rationale. Consider a field distinguishing an illustrative excerpt from the evidence supporting the complete report-level code. The frontend patch shows quotation source/missingness and an excerpt limitation, but deliberately leaves scientific codes unchanged. Related broader work: #114.

Start by reviewing the full reports and coding record for 10.1037/a0017094 and 10.1037/xge0001886, then inspect the frontend patch that shows quotation source, missingness, and excerpt limitations. Done means the mixed verdict has evidence for both replicated and unreplicated components or a structured coding rationale, with a clear distinction between an illustrative excerpt and report-level evidence.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.