Brookings⁠33%

Global Economy and Development ⁠97%

5/7/2023, 8:23:34 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Left Leaning Bias, Framing Effect, and Pessimism Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 95.1% saturation with 77 hits. Analysis detected 356 faulty-reasoning hits from 81 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 95.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠97% (716 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 96.70% of the article peer group.

The global economy is on an unsustainable path characterized by widening economic and social inequities, environmental degradation, and increasing concentration of poverty and deprivation that threaten global peace and prosperity. 
The Global Economy and Development program at Brookings generates actionable insights and tools that address shared economic and social challenges. 
We collaborate with local, national, and global policy actors and communities to achieve a more equitable, sustainable, and prosperous world for all. 
Learn more about the program 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Brookings: 4.3%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 2.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 24.7%Brookings: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias24.7%This article: 37.0%Brookings: 4.9%Framing Effect37.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 27.2%Brookings: 3.0%Optimism Bias27.2%This article: 37.0%Brookings: 1.8%Pessimism Bias37.0%This article: 37.0%Brookings: 5.2%Negativity Bias37.0%This article: 24.7%Brookings: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias24.7%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.7%Brookings: 3.6%Appeal to Authority24.7%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 5.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 37.0%Brookings: 2.0%Appeal to Emotion37.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 3.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 95.1%Brookings: 2.3%Biased Writer Voice95.1%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 2.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 64.2%Brookings: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias64.2%This article: 0.0%Brookings: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 30.9%Brookings: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…30.9%

81 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker58%attributed speech34writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageThe Global Economy and Development program at Brookings • 20 words • 100.0% coverageThe Global Economy and Development program at Brookings • 22 words • 100.0% coverageThe Global Economy and Development program at Brookings • 5 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
47 attributed words100% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+11.8 ptsWriter: 88.2%The Global Economy and Development program at Brookings: 100.0%100.0%Politically Left Leaning B-41.4 ptsWriter: 88.2%The Global Economy and Development program at Brookings: 46.8%46.8%Attempt to Sell a Product +53.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%The Global Economy and Development program at Brookings: 53.2%53.2%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.