Topic summary
⁠80%2 analyzed articles/videos738 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Cycling Safety results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Availability Heuristic, and Confirmation Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 13.2% saturation with 694 hits. Analysis detected 4,859 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,250 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (8,512 of 16,562 topics). This Cycling Safety is better (less manipulative) than 51.40% of the peer group.
Cycling Safety
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 5,250
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

49% percentile
025507510048.6% percentile
2.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.3K 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 5.5%5.5%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 13.2%13.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.7%0.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.5%1.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.6%1.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 12.6%12.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.5%1.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 2.4%2.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 3.1%3.1%

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 13.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 12.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 3.7%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 4.6%Hindsight Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.9%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 2.2%Recency Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 0.8%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.1%Primacy Effect: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos