Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video3,584 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amish results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Negativity Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 10.5% saturation with 1,124 hits. Analysis detected 5,884 faulty-reasoning hits from 10,752 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠4% (15,005 of 15,555 topics). This Amish is better (less manipulative) than 96.50% of the peer group.
Amish
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 10,752
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

4% percentile
02550751003.5% percentile
1.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles10.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 10.4%10.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.4%3.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.9%2.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.6%0.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.6%2.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.5%0.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.5%1.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.4%0.4%

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: Topic 10.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos