Topic summary
⁠43%2 analyzed articles/videos750 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Birmingham results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Negativity Bias, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 15.5% saturation with 501 hits. Analysis detected 2,902 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,225 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠66% (5,564 of 16,154 topics). This Birmingham is worse (more manipulative) than 65.60% of the peer group.
Birmingham
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 3,225
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

66% percentile
025507510065.6% percentile
3.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.2K 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 8.3%8.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.9%8.9%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 15.5%15.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.9%0.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 5.5%5.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 11.2%11.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.0%2.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 3.1%3.1%

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: Topic 8.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 11.2%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Topic 15.5%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 9.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 9.0%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 0.5%Anecdotal: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.5%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 1.1%Recency Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.5%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.0%Begging the Question: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.7%Burden of Proof: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 0.4%Blind-Spot Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.2%Indoctrination: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos