Publication summary
38% 20 analyzed articles/videos 6,502 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Rough Draft Atlanta results contain 47 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Emotion , with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 10.4% saturation with 4,384 hits . Analysis detected 24,575 faulty-reasoning hits from 42,051 analyzed words across 20 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.2% and a BS Rank of 14% (343 of 398 publications). This Rough Draft Atlanta is better (less manipulative) than 86.10% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 42,051
Article count: 20
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
14% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 13.9% percentile 1.2% BS Score20 analyzed articles42.1K 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 3.8% 3.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 4.4% 4.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 3.5% 3.5% Attempt to Sell a Product… Sitewide 0.5% Publication 10.4% 10.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 2.3% 2.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 1.9% 1.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 0.9% 0.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 1.6% 1.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 2.6% 2.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 2.1% 2.1% 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 3.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 4.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 2.3%, sitewide 11.1% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Publication 10.4%, sitewide 0.5% Availability Heuristic: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 2.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 3.1%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.0%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst