Publication summary
16%1 analyzed article/video988 analyzed words
BS Summary: These KUAR results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Availability Heuristic, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 350 hits. Analysis detected 2,386 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,952 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of 73% (105 of 379 publications). This KUAR is worse (more manipulative) than 72.50% of the peer group.
KUAR
Publication ranking list
PercentilePublicationBS Score
0%WSB-TV Channel 2 - Atlanta1%
1%Brookings1%
1%FactCheck.org1%
1%@politifact1%
2%Berkeleyside1%
73%KUAR (selected)3%
99%Utah Hockey Club13%
100%MS NOW Insights Community23%
100%MS NOW Live Events26%
100%www.globalsecurity.org30%
100%NBC 6 South Florida33%
Publication details
Total words: 3,952
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed publications

73% percentile
025507510072.5% percentile
2.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles4K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

PublicationSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Publication 4.0%4.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Publication 6.9%6.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Publication 4.6%4.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Publication 1.4%1.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Publication 0.6%0.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Publication 4.9%4.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Publication 4.1%4.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Publication 8.9%8.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Publication 0.7%0.7%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Publication 0.3%0.3%

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 4.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Publication 6.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Publication 4.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Publication 4.9%, sitewide 9.1%Anecdotal: Publication 8.9%, sitewide 5.2%Hasty Generalization: Publication 4.1%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 6.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 5.5%, sitewide 3.3%Biased Writer Voice: Publication 3.2%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 3.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 1.9%Recency Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Publication 2.6%, sitewide 0.0%Loss Aversion: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 1.5%Unattributed Quote: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Publication 0.6%, sitewide 0.8%Circular Reasoning: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 0.1%Appeal to Nature: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide ratePublication rate

Analyzed articles and videos