How We Analyze
Every Mapshock analysis follows structured methods with built-in quality controls. Here is what the terms in your briefings mean.
Confidence Levels
High Confidence
Strong evidence from multiple independent, reliable sources. Key judgments are well-supported and alternative explanations have been considered and addressed.
Moderate Confidence
Reasonable evidence but with some gaps. Sources generally agree but may lack diversity or independence. Alternative explanations exist and cannot be fully ruled out.
Low Confidence
Limited or conflicting evidence. Significant uncertainty remains. The assessment represents the best available judgment but could change substantially with new information.
Source Grading
Grade A — Completely Reliable
Wire services (Reuters, AP), official government statistics, peer-reviewed journals, and central bank publications.
Grade B — Usually Reliable
Major broadsheet newspapers, established think tanks (Brookings, CSIS), international organizations (World Bank, IMF), and recognized industry analysts.
Grade C — Fairly Reliable
Regional quality news outlets, academic institutions, NGOs with domain expertise, and specialized industry publications.
Grade D — Not Usually Reliable
Unknown commercial domains without established track records. These sources are flagged and given lower weight in analysis.
Grade E — Unreliable
Social media platforms, personal blogs, and unverified user-generated content. Included only when no better source exists, and always flagged.
Analytical Methods
What they are
Every analysis applies structured methods drawn from professional intelligence practice — domain-specific framing, key questions, and structured analytic techniques appropriate to the topic.
Cognitive bias awareness
Analytical methods are designed to surface competing explanations and flag where common reasoning patterns — confirmation bias, anchoring, availability bias — may distort conclusions. This is built into how analyses are structured, not a post-hoc check.
Why it matters
Unstructured analysis is prone to systematic errors that go unnoticed. Applying the same disciplined methods every time reduces the chance that a conclusion is an artifact of how the question was framed.
Source Count
What it means
The number of independent sources consulted during analysis. Higher counts indicate broader evidence collection. Deep assessments typically use 25+ sources across 5+ source types.
Why it matters
More sources reduce the risk of relying on a single perspective and increase the robustness of conclusions. Source diversity (government, academic, industry, media) matters as much as quantity.
Analysis Types
Assessment
Deep-dive analysis with 25+ sources, structured analytical techniques across relevant intelligence domains, and calibrated confidence on every key finding.
Intelligence Brief
Timely analysis of trending developments with 12+ sources, structured analytical techniques, and source grading. Published regularly.
Flash
Quick-turn analysis of breaking developments with 5+ sources. Concise and focused, designed for rapid consumption.
Key Findings
What they are
The most important analytical judgments from the analysis, each tagged with a confidence level. Key findings represent conclusions, not just facts — they include the analyst's assessment of what the evidence means.
How to read them
Each finding pairs a confidence indicator with a substantive judgment. "High Confidence: X is happening" means strong evidence supports that conclusion. "Moderate Confidence: Y is likely" means the evidence points that direction but with notable uncertainty.
Want to check a specific source? Try our free tool.
Source Reliability Checker →