Academic researchers
Scope: Nationally representative survey of Indian adults 18+, fieldwork 2019–2020
Generally cited accurately. Occasional omission of fieldwork date (pre-COVID) when using results to describe present-day attitudes.
Religion in India: Tolerance and Segregation
The only Research-Grade report in the CID corpus. Pew conducted face-to-face interviews with nearly 30,000 adults across India in 17 languages. The methodology is fully documented, the sampling is rigorous, and the limitations are clearly stated. This is what methodological excellence looks like.
Abstract
This evaluation applies the CID Rubric v0.3.2 to Pew Research Center's 2021 report "Religion in India: Tolerance and Segregation." The composite score of 8.3/10 (Research-Grade) reflects strong methodological rigor across most dimensions.
A full academic narrative for this report is in preparation. The dimensional analysis below is generated from scored data. See the Scoring Data view for the complete evidence trail.
Dimensional Analysis
D1
Definitional Precision
9/10All survey constructs operationalized via published question text in 17 languages. Validated Likert scaling for borderline constructs.
D2
Classification Rigor
8/10Adapted for survey context
Inter-coder reliability reinterpreted as interviewer consistency and pilot testing — both fully documented per AAPOR standards.
D3
Case Capture & Sampling
9/10Stratified multistage area probability sample. ACS-style demographic weighting. Coverage frame stated: Indian adults 18+.
D4
Coverage Symmetry
9/10Identical questions posed to Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Jains. Symmetric by instrument design.
D5
Source Independence
8/1091 pewforum.org URLs misclassified by automated analyzer
Pew Charitable Trusts funding disclosed. No advocacy positions on India's religious politics. 91 self-citations are methodology documentation — not a sourcing problem.
D6
Verification Standards
8/10Microdata available on formal request through the Pew Research Center archive. Under the revised D6 criteria (v0.3.1), a documented formal request process satisfies the verification standard. Data is not available for open download, but the archive process is publicly documented and consistently honored.
D7
Transparency & Governance
8/10Funding disclosed in front matter. AAPOR disclosure published. Full 17-language questionnaire archived.
D8
Counter-Evidence
6/10Limitations in appendix only — not in chapter text
Mode effects, non-response bias, and geographic variation are discussed in the methodology appendix but not surfaced in chapter introductions where most readers engage.
Citation Ecosystem
0 escalations · 1 trackedPost-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.
Additional Citations Tracked (1)
Limitations
This evaluation assesses methodological rigor only. It does not evaluate the factual accuracy of individual claims or the existence of the phenomena the report describes. The CID Rubric v0.3.2 is designed for published research reports; application to certain document types requires adapted interpretation of specific dimensions. The CID has not independently investigated the organizations or individuals referenced in the report.