Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video593 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Children's Finance results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Halo Effect, and Hasty Generalization, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 17.5% saturation with 416 hits. Analysis detected 2,346 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,372 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠65% (5,917 of 16,562 topics). This Children's Finance is worse (more manipulative) than 64.30% of the peer group.
Children's Finance
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠65%Children's Finance (selected)4%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 2,372
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

64% percentile
025507510064.3% percentile
3.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.4K 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 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.8%4.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 15.3%15.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 17.5%17.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.7%0.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.6%1.6%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 2.4%2.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 4.6%4.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 9.5%9.5%

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 3.3%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 17.5%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 15.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 15.3%, sitewide 6.0%Halo Effect: Topic 9.5%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 7.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 4.0%Bandwagon: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.9%, sitewide 3.3%Primacy Effect: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.7%Special Pleading: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 0.3%Unattributed Quote: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.1%Composition/Division: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos