Topic summary
⁠83%1 analyzed article/video362 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Contact Sharing results contain 22 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Halo Effect, and Optimism Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 22.9% saturation with 249 hits. Analysis detected 1,335 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,086 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠80% (3,317 of 16,562 topics). This Contact Sharing is worse (more manipulative) than 80.00% of the peer group.
Contact Sharing
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 1,086
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

80% percentile
025507510080.0% percentile
5.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.1K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 22.9%22.9%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 21.2%21.2%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 8.6%8.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.6%2.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.7%2.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.8%0.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 13.3%13.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 11.9%11.9%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Topic 0.5%0.5%

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 8.6%, sitewide 26.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 22.9%, sitewide 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 21.2%, sitewide 0.5%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Topic 13.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 11.9%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 6.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 4.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.9%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Special Pleading: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.3%Indoctrination: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 0.0%Primacy Effect: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos