Publication summary
6% 16 analyzed articles/videos 6,829 analyzed words
BS Summary: These BirminghamWatch results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Emotion , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 4.5% saturation with 1,327 hits . Analysis detected 9,954 faulty-reasoning hits from 29,518 analyzed words across 16 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.8% and a BS Rank of 8% (515 of 557 publications). This BirminghamWatch is better (less manipulative) than 92.40% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 29,518
Article count: 16
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
8% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 7.6% percentile 0.8% BS Score16 analyzed articles29.5K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Publication 2.5% 2.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 1.4% 1.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 2.4% 2.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 1.0% 1.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 0.6% 0.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 1.0% 1.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 0.4% 0.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 1.3% 1.3% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Publication 0.3% 0.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 1.9% 1.9% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 10% 10% 20% 20% 30% 30% 40% 40% 50% 50% Framing Effect: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 2.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 4.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 0.5%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 0.5% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst