Post-publication citation analysis tracks how this report's findings have been represented
in subsequent publications, policy documents, media coverage, and advocacy materials.
Entries marked as escalations indicate instances where the report was cited with scope
or authority beyond what the original methodology establishes.
Escalation Patterns (2)
Claimed scope: Population prevalence of caste discrimination among South Asian Americans in California and nationally
Established scope: Self-selected respondents who engaged with advocacy networks; findings cannot be generalized to population
Legislative testimony cited the 67% figure as establishing prevalence of caste discrimination in the South Asian American population. The figure describes the self-selected sample, not the population. The distinction was not disclosed in testimony.
Claimed scope: Documented workplace caste discrimination prevalence in South Asian American professional communities
Established scope: Survey of advocacy-network-recruited respondents; workplace subsample not reported separately
Multiple corporations adopted anti-caste HR policies citing this survey as evidentiary basis. The methodological limitations were not disclosed in the policy rationales reviewed.
Additional Citations Tracked (1)
Scope: Explicitly characterized as limited by sampling methodology — the most accurate citation in the corpus
Carnegie's footnote 29 explicitly documents the sampling limitations. This is the only major citation that accurately represents what the survey can and cannot establish. It is the methodological landmark citation in the corpus.