Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,373 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Corn Husk Prices results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 17.6% saturation with 724 hits. Analysis detected 8,227 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,119 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠82% (3,080 of 16,562 topics). This Corn Husk Prices is worse (more manipulative) than 81.40% of the peer group.
Corn Husk Prices
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠82%Corn Husk Prices (selected)6%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 4,119
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

81% percentile
025507510081.4% percentile
5.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.1K 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 11.4%11.4%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 17.6%17.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 12.7%12.7%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Topic 10.8%10.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 9.9%9.9%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Topic 7.0%7.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 10.1%10.1%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Topic 5.6%5.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 12.1%12.1%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 6.6%6.6%

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 11.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 15.7%, sitewide 19.2%Hasty Generalization: Topic 17.6%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 14.1%, sitewide 15.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 12.7%, sitewide 3.3%Confirmation Bias: Topic 12.1%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 11.1%Loss Aversion: Topic 10.8%, sitewide 2.5%Anecdotal: Topic 10.1%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 9.9%, sitewide 3.7%Halo Effect: Topic 9.2%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 9.1%False Dilemma: Topic 7.0%, sitewide 1.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 7.0%, sitewide 6.9%Recency Bias: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 2.7%Straw Man: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 2.7%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 4.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 3.1%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos