Topic summary
82% 8 analyzed articles/videos 9,269 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Cannabis Industry results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Optimism Bias , and Appeal to Authority , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 18.1% saturation with 4,670 hits . Analysis detected 23,116 faulty-reasoning hits from 25,749 analyzed words across 8 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 28% (11,468 of 15,766 topics). This Cannabis Industry is better (less manipulative) than 72.70% of the peer group. Cannabis Industry
Topic details
Total words: 25,749
Article count: 8
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
27% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 27.3% percentile 2.1% BS Score8 analyzed articles25.7K 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% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 3.7% 3.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 8.6% 8.6% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 18.1% 18.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 2.0% 2.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 0.8% 0.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 1.7% 1.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 2.6% 2.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 4.2% 4.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 6.3% 6.3% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Topic 0.7% 0.7% 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 18.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 8.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 9.1% Optimism Bias: Topic 8.4%, sitewide 6.0% Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 5.3% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 3.7% Anecdotal: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 4.0% Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 1.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.5% Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.2% Bandwagon: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst