Topic summary
⁠43%2 analyzed articles/videos1,850 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Argentine Politics results contain 48 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Framing Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 16.8% saturation with 2,149 hits. Analysis detected 14,276 faulty-reasoning hits from 12,756 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠35% (10,824 of 16,558 topics). This Argentine Politics is better (less manipulative) than 65.40% of the peer group.
Argentine Politics
Topic details
Total words: 12,756
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

35% percentile
025507510034.6% percentile
2.3% BS Score2 analyzed articles12.8K 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 6.7%6.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.2%2.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 16.9%16.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 11.4%11.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.7%0.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.5%2.5%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.1%0.1%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.9%0.9%

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: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 11.4%, sitewide 19.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 16.9%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.7%, sitewide 3.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 1.9%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 3.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.3%, sitewide 0.8%Ad Hominem: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 2.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos