Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Congressional Finances results contain 10 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 18.4% saturation with 684 hits. Analysis detected 2,790 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,718 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 15,778 topics). This Congressional Finances is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Congressional Finances
Topic details
Total words: 3,718
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 8.7%8.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 11.0%11.0%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Topic 5.3%5.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 12.6%12.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 12.1%12.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 1.5%1.5%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 1.3%1.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 18.4%18.4%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Topic 2.0%2.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 2.2%2.2%

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 8.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 18.4%, sitewide 19.2%Confirmation Bias: Topic 12.6%, sitewide 7.5%Hasty Generalization: Topic 12.1%, sitewide 8.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 11.0%, sitewide 5.3%Tu Quoque: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 0.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 4.0%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos