Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video2,051 analyzed words
BS Summary: These California Policy results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Optimism Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.5% saturation with 865 hits. Analysis detected 5,482 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,204 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (14,850 of 16,562 topics). This California Policy is better (less manipulative) than 89.70% of the peer group.
California Policy
Topic details
Total words: 8,204
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

10% percentile
025507510010.3% percentile
1.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles8.2K 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 5.3%5.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 6.5%6.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 10.5%10.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.1%3.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.2%0.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.9%0.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.2%1.2%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.8%0.8%

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 5.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 10.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos