There’s a verb test I use in the journal article preparation workshop. Take the sentence where you say what your paper does, and look at the main verb.
“Explores.” “Examines.” “Traces.” “Describes.”
These verbs usually describe a project.
“Argues.” “Reveals.” “Challenges.” “Complicates.”
These verbs are more likely to introduce a claim.
The verb test works at a smaller level than The so-what problem. The so-what question asks why the work matters. The verb test asks whether you have committed to a position yet.
Academic writing often leaves the claim implied. A basic form is: “This paper uses X to argue Y about Z.” X is the project or dataset, Y is the claim, and Z is the larger issue it addresses.
The Digital Humanities version is the move from technical description to analytical claim. “We used a Random Forest classifier” records a procedure. The build process, the methodology, the design choices become useful once framed as evidence for something.
The shift is uncomfortable because it requires committing to a position that could be wrong. “This paper examines…” is difficult to dispute and gives the reader little to evaluate.
Grant proposals have the same difficulty. A committee needs to know what the applicant expects the project to establish and why that result deserves support.