Topic summary
⁠41%4 analyzed articles/videos1,299 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Conservation Policy results contain 44 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Politically Right Leaning Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 16.5% saturation with 1,822 hits. Analysis detected 10,017 faulty-reasoning hits from 11,041 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠26% (12,369 of 16,562 topics). This Conservation Policy is better (less manipulative) than 74.70% of the peer group.
Conservation Policy
Topic details
Total words: 11,041
Article count: 4
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

25% percentile
025507510025.3% percentile
2.1% BS Score4 analyzed articles11K 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 6.1%6.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 16.5%16.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.5%1.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 8.0%8.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Topic 7.5%7.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.1%1.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.4%0.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.5%1.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.6%2.6%

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 16.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 7.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 7.5%, sitewide 1.4%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 7.5%, sitewide 5.3%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.3%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos