Topic summary
⁠80%1 analyzed article/video1,749 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Car Hacking results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Biased Writer Voice, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 27.6% saturation with 1,448 hits. Analysis detected 4,630 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,247 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠43% (8,866 of 15,535 topics). This Car Hacking is better (less manipulative) than 57.10% of the peer group.
Car Hacking
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 5,247
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

43% percentile
025507510042.9% percentile
2.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.2K 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 1.1%1.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.6%3.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 27.6%27.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.3%0.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.6%4.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.9%0.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.0%4.0%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 3.8%3.8%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.6%0.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 2.3%2.3%

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%Negativity Bias: Topic 27.6%, sitewide 19.2%Framing Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.0%Indoctrination: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 0.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.0%, sitewide 3.3%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 2.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos