Topic summary
ā 0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Companionship results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Availability Heuristic, and Confirmation Bias, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 2.4% saturation with 112 hits. Analysis detected 883 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,758 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ā 0% (0 of 16,212 topics). This Companionship is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Companionship
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
ā 0%Uber1%
ā 0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
ā 0%Opera1%
ā 0%Holocaust1%
ā 0%Privacy Policy1%
ā 100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
ā 100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
ā 100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
ā 100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
ā 100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
ā 0%Companionship (selected)0%
Topic details
Total words: 4,758
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0ā€“50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 0.7%0.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.0%1.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.5%1.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.0%1.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.2%0.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.2%1.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.3%0.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.1%1.1%

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 0.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.1%, sitewide 3.3%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.5%Straw Man: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.8%Blind-Spot Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 0.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos