Topic summary
⁠4%1 analyzed article/video122 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Cincinnati Bengals Practice results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Recency Bias, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 6.4% saturation with 31 hits. Analysis detected 81 faulty-reasoning hits from 488 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠69% (7,596 of 24,041 topics). This Cincinnati Bengals Practice is worse (more manipulative) than 68.40% of the peer group.
Cincinnati Bengals Practice
Topic details
Total words: 488
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

68% percentile
025507510068.4% percentile
3.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles488 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.3%6.3%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 1.2%1.2%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 3.7%3.7%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 1.2%1.2%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 4.1%4.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%5%5%10%10%15%15%20%20%25%25%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 19.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 4.0%Recency Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 2.7%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.5%Negativity BiasSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos