Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video736 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Coaching Philosophy results contain 41 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Halo Effect, and Appeal to Authority, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 14% saturation with 411 hits. Analysis detected 3,644 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,944 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of ⁠52% (8,091 of 16,562 topics). This Coaching Philosophy is worse (more manipulative) than 51.20% of the peer group.
Coaching Philosophy
Topic details
Total words: 2,944
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

51% percentile
025507510051.2% percentile
3.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.9K 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 6.3%6.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.8%4.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.3%4.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 14.0%14.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.5%0.5%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 4.5%4.5%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.3%0.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.7%2.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 10.6%10.6%

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 6.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 14.0%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.4%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 10.7%, sitewide 8.1%Halo Effect: Topic 10.6%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 6.9%Ad Hominem: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 2.2%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.0%Status Quo Bias: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 2.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 3.1%Anecdotal: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 4.6%Indoctrination: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 0.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 3.7%False Dilemma: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 1.5%Begging the Question: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.3%Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos