The conjecture itself:
k-SAT formula is satisfiable if no pair of unit assignment $l$ and $\overline l$ imply the formula to contain unsatisfiable (k-1)-SAT.
Example (XOR-SAT has no edges and cycles in implication graph, so it's simple example):
$$(\overline x\oplus y\oplus z)\land(x\oplus y\oplus v)\land(x\oplus y\oplus w)\land(x\oplus z\oplus v)\land(x\oplus z\oplus w)\land(x\oplus v\oplus w)$$
If in this formula we'll put $x$, we get $(y\oplus z)\land(y\oplus\overline v)\land(z\oplus\overline v)$ which is unsatisfiable.
So, we only can put $\overline x$: this yields us $(y\oplus v)\land(y\oplus w)\land(v\oplus w)$ which is also unsatisfiable.
Now we conclude that formula is unsatisfiable.
My thoughts on it:
The rule surely works if $k = 2$: 2-SAT is unsatisfiable iff there are two unit assignments $l$ and $\overline l$ that make the formula to contain unsatisfiable 1-SAT (two opposing unit clauses).
In fact algorithm would be:
for i = 1..n
assign x_i
while unit clauses are presented
apply unit propagation
if opposing unit clauses found
assign -x_i
while unit clauses are presented
apply unit propagation
if opposing unit clauses found
return UNSAT
return SAT
And it does actually the same as implication graph analisys (primitive, though).
But what about $k > 2$?
For $k=3$ we'd need to change algorithm:
for i = 1..n
assign x_i
while unit clauses are presented
apply unit propagation
run algorithm for 2SAT
if 2SAT returned UNSAT
b_i = 1
assign -x_i
while unit clauses are presented
apply unit propagation
run algorithm for 2SAT
if 2SAT returned UNSAT
b_i += 2
if b_i == 3
return UNSAT
else if b_i == 2
add clause x_i
else if b_i == 1
add clause -x_i
if b_i > 0
i = 1
return SAT
Maybe this is not the best implementation, but this is the idea of algorithm. It applies unit assignment and then solves 2SAT for all 2-clauses, in fact it finds all connectivities between opposing literals (finding connectivity between $x$ and $\overline x$ means new unit clause).