Topic summary
⁠36%1 analyzed article/video1,601 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chula Vista City Government results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ad Hominem, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.5% saturation with 358 hits. Analysis detected 2,829 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,803 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠17% (13,880 of 16,562 topics). This Chula Vista City Government is better (less manipulative) than 83.80% of the peer group.
Chula Vista City Government
Topic details
Total words: 4,803
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

16% percentile
025507510016.2% percentile
1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.8K 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 2.8%2.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.5%7.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.3%0.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.3%5.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.7%0.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.8%2.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.6%3.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.5%0.5%

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 2.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.6%Ad Hominem: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 2.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.4%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos