| Dim | Dimension | Score | Weight | Flag |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Definitional Precision | 2 | 12% | Classification defined only by examples — no operational criteria |
| D2 | Classification Rigor | 1 | 18% | No codebook — classification criteria not disclosed |
| D3 | Case Capture & Sampling | 3 | 15% | No documented inclusion criteria for 312-organization list |
| D4 | Coverage Symmetry | 1 | 15% | No equivalent scrutiny of opposing groups or incidents |
| D5 | Source Independence | 1 | 10% | ⚑ 73% of citations trace to CSOH-affiliated organizations — undisclosed |
| D6 | Verification Standards | 3 | 18% | Source posts not archived — independent verification not possible |
| D7 | Transparency & Governance | 2 | 5% | No funding disclosure — founder relationship not disclosed |
| D8 | Counter-Evidence | 3 | 7% | No limitations section — no denominator reporting throughout |
| Composite Score | 2.1 | Advocacy-Grade | ||
Scope: 73% of endnote citations trace to India Hate Lab or Hindutva Watch, both founded by the same individual as CSOH. The report describes these organizations as independent sources. The shared founder relationship is established through IRS 990 filings and is not disclosed anywhere in the report.
Scope: No codebook or classification guide was published. The criteria used to classify 312 organizations cannot be independently verified or replicated. This makes the report's central claim — a mapped network of hate organizations — unverifiable by design.
Scope: The report documents incidents and organizations on one side of communal conflicts without applying equivalent monitoring to the opposing side. No explanation is given for this asymmetry, and it is not acknowledged as a scope limitation.
Scope: Percentages are cited throughout pages 12–34 without sample sizes. Without denominators, these figures cannot be evaluated — 60% of an unknown number of incidents is not a meaningful statistic.
Scope: Funding sources are not disclosed. The absence of disclosure is not acknowledged in the report.
Scope: 312 organizations are listed without documentation of the search methodology or inclusion criteria. A researcher cannot determine whether the list is comprehensive, selective, or reproducible.
Classification defined only by examples — no operational criteria
'Hindutva hate' is defined through a curated list of examples with no operational definition that would allow independent classification. Borderline cases have no decision rule. A trained coder cannot replicate classifications using only the published report.
No codebook — classification criteria not disclosed
No codebook was published. No reliability testing was reported. The number of coders is not stated. Classifications cannot be verified or replicated by outside researchers.
No documented inclusion criteria for 312-organization list
The report claims to identify 312 organizations but does not document the search methodology, geographic coverage criteria, or inclusion and exclusion rules. There is no null data — no accounting of what was searched for but not included.
No equivalent scrutiny of opposing groups or incidents
The report monitors one side of documented communal conflicts without applying equivalent scrutiny to opposing organizations or incidents. The Swap Test fails: the methodology as described would not be applied symmetrically. This asymmetry is not acknowledged as a scope limitation.
⚑ 73% of citations trace to CSOH-affiliated organizations — undisclosed
India Hate Lab and Hindutva Watch are cited throughout as independent sources. All three organizations share the same founder, established through IRS 990 filings. This relationship is not disclosed in the report, the author bios, or the acknowledgments. 73% of endnote citations trace to this affiliated network.
Source posts not archived — independent verification not possible
The underlying incident data is not available for review. Source posts are not archived with accessible permalinks. Independent verification of even a small sample is not possible from the published report.
No funding disclosure — founder relationship not disclosed
Funding sources are not listed. The CSOH/IHL/Hindutva Watch shared founder relationship is not disclosed. IRS 990 filings document the governance overlap that the report's sourcing structure depends on concealing.
No limitations section — no denominator reporting throughout
The report contains no limitations section. Percentages are cited throughout pages 12–34 without sample sizes, making them uninterpretable. No engagement with prior critiques of the classification methodology.
How this report's findings have been cited or applied after publication. Severity reflects the gap between what the report establishes and how it was represented.
Claimed scope: Independent documentation of organized hate targeting Indian Americans
Established scope: Incident tracker with 73% circular sourcing from undisclosed affiliated organizations; classifications not independently verifiable
The report was cited in congressional testimony about anti-Hindu hate without disclosure of the CSOH/IHL/Hindutva Watch shared founder relationship or the absence of a codebook. The 'independent' characterization of the source network was not challenged.
Claimed scope: Documented prevalence of Hindutva-related hate incidents across 14 Indian states
Established scope: Proprietary classification of 312 organizations using undisclosed criteria and affiliated sources
Multiple news outlets reported the 312-organization figure and state-level breakdowns as documented findings without noting the absence of a codebook or the sourcing relationships.
Scope: Organization sharing CSOH's founder — structurally not an independent source
IHL is cited 8 times as an independent source. It subsequently cited this CSOH report in its own publications, completing the circular citation loop. Neither citation discloses the shared founder relationship.