Engineered Reality / Psyop Risk Scorecard

A 0–100 rubric for assessing whether a narrative is organic, biased, constructed, or likely engineered.

How to Use This Scorecard

For any claim, media event, or narrative you want to evaluate:

Read each criterion below and assign a score from 0–5 based on how strongly it applies.
Add the five scores inside each category to get the category subtotal (0–25).
Sum all four category subtotals to get a TOTAL SCORE (0–100).
Compare the total to the interpretation ranges at the bottom of this page.

Use this as a thinking aid, not an oracle: high scores suggest risk of narrative engineering, not guaranteed proof.

CATEGORY A — Information Source Integrity

(0–25 pts)

A1. Origin Obscurity (0–5)
0 = Clear origin, verifiable 5 = Anonymous, contradictory, or unverifiable origin
A2. Consistency of Claims (0–5)
0 = Statements consistent across time/sources 5 = Changing, evolving, shifting narratives
A3. Evidence Transparency (0–5)
0 = Data open, replicable, no redactions 5 = Classified, redacted, lost, “destroyed,” or withheld
A4. Gatekeeper Saturation (0–5)
0 = Multiple independent reporting channels 5 = All information flows through a single government/agency/journalist
A5. Counter-Narrative Suppression (0–5)
0 = Debate allowed 5 = Suppression, bans, deplatforming, or immediate official dismissal

CATEGORY B — Psychological Targeting

(0–25 pts)

B1. Emotional Hot-Button Activation (0–5)
0 = Neutral or boring 5 = Fear, outrage, hero/villain framing, moral panic
B2. Identity Leverage (0–5)
0 = Not targeted at any identity group 5 = Uses group identity, tribalism, or “us vs them” mechanics
B3. Viral Narrative Memes (0–5)
0 = No memeability 5 = Simple, compelling, repeatable meme structure
B4. Manufactured Consensus (0–5)
0 = Organic disagreement 5 = Instant “everyone agrees” pressure
B5. Narrative Stickiness (0–5)
0 = Fades fast 5 = Becomes a long-term belief / repeating social trope

CATEGORY C — Operational Footprint

(0–25 pts)

C1. Coordination Complexity (0–5)
0 = Requires no coordination 5 = Requires multiple agencies, media partners, or networks
C2. Timing Suspiciousness (0–5)
0 = Random timing 5 = Convenient timing supporting political/military goals
C3. Beneficiary Clarity (0–5)
0 = No clear beneficiary 5 = One or two actors benefit massively
C4. Motive Alignment (0–5)
0 = No strategic motive 5 = Perfectly aligns with known agenda or historical patterns of psyops
C5. Resource Investment (0–5)
0 = No signs of funding 5 = High-budget production, coordination, media saturation

CATEGORY D — Reality Distortion Mechanics

(0–25 pts)

D1. Implausibility Level (0–5)
0 = Entirely plausible / mundane 5 = Requires suspension of disbelief or contradicts physical reality
D2. Narrative Fluency (0–5)
0 = Messy, contradictory, chaotic 5 = Story flows too perfectly (a hallmark of manufactured narrative)
D3. Magic-Bullet Evidence (0–5)
0 = No “perfect” smoking gun 5 = One single piece of evidence that “proves everything”
D4. Coincidence Density (0–5)
0 = Random 5 = Too many coincidences to ignore
D5. Hero/Villain Construction (0–5)
0 = No archetypes 5 = Hollywood-style black-and-white character framing

Total Score Interpretation (0–100)

Add all four category subtotals for a final score. Use this as a heuristic to talk about narrative risk:

0–20: Organic Reality — likely mundane, low evidence of narrative engineering.
21–40: Possible Narrative Bias — normal human/media bias, but not strongly “engineered.”
41–60: Constructed Narrative Elements Present — significant shaping or framing is visible.
61–80: Engineered Reality Likely — strong indicators of coordination and psychological targeting.
81–100: High-Confidence Psyop — pattern strongly resembles deliberate information operation.

Tip: You can track your scores in a spreadsheet and log different events over time to see which ones cluster in the “Engineered Reality” or “High-Confidence Psyop” range.