Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Cognitive Assessment results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Halo Effect, and Self-Serving Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 16% saturation with 297 hits. Analysis detected 1,685 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,852 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Cognitive Assessment is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Cognitive Assessment
Topic details
Total words: 1,852
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 0.4%0.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 11.9%11.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.3%2.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 16.0%16.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.5%2.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.9%1.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.2%1.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 6.8%6.8%Appeal to NatureSitewide 0.2%Topic 3.3%3.3%

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 11.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 16.0%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 9.1%Halo Effect: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 6.7%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 7.5%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 3.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 4.0%Appeal to Nature: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 0.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%No True Scotsman: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.1%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.9%Dunning-Kruger Effect: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.1%Tu Quoque: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos