if you had to analyze a text written by someone involved in the ratification debate, how would you be able to distinguish between a text written by an Anti-Federalist and one written by a Federalist?

To identify the people involved, the federalists would be in favor of the central government, while the anti federalist would oppose having a strong central government.

These were the founding fathers that were in support of the United States having a central form of government tnat controlled the states.

These groups did not want a strong federal government. They wanted a government were the states would have great power.

Read more on ratification here:

link

The main difference between Federalists and Anti-Federalists at the time of the ratification of the Constitution of the United States was in the powers that the federal government would have compared to those of the states.

Thus, the Federalists defended the idea of a strong and comprehensive federal government, as described in the articles of the Constitution. In turn, the Anti-Federalists feared that this strong government could trample on the rights of citizens and state governments, thus fighting for the adoption of amendments that would guarantee these rights: the Bill of Rights.

Therefore, all writing that promoted a broad federal government and with great prerogatives would be Federalist, while all writing that defended the rights and powers of the states in particular would be Anti-Federalist.

a social contract.

"a social contract is an agreement between citizens and their leader where the citizens give up certain freedoms in exchange for protection. the constitution of the united states is an example of a social contract."