Topic summary
⁠14%1 analyzed article/video584 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chinese Meddling results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Negativity Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 208 hits. Analysis detected 1,431 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,336 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠27% (12,107 of 16,562 topics). This Chinese Meddling is better (less manipulative) than 73.10% of the peer group.
Chinese Meddling
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 2,336
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

27% percentile
025507510026.9% percentile
2.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.3K 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 3.9%3.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.2%4.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.6%1.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.9%0.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.4%2.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.1%2.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 5.4%5.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.2%1.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 8.9%8.9%

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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Unattributed Quote: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 1.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 4.0%Ad Hominem: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 2.2%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Red Herring: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 0.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.0%Hindsight Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.9%Indoctrination: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.8%Blind-Spot Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 0.0%False Dilemma: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos