Topic summary
⁠35%1 analyzed article/video1,901 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Daytime Tv results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Negativity Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 10.8% saturation with 825 hits. Analysis detected 5,263 faulty-reasoning hits from 7,604 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of ⁠23% (12,276 of 15,752 topics). This Daytime Tv is better (less manipulative) than 77.90% of the peer group.
Daytime Tv
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 7,604
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

22% percentile
025507510022.1% percentile
2.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles7.6K 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 1.7%1.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.5%8.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.1%2.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.4%1.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 10.8%10.8%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.2%0.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.1%4.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.8%1.8%

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 1.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 10.8%, sitewide 5.3%Halo Effect: Topic 9.5%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.7%Hindsight Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.0%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.7%, sitewide 0.8%False Dilemma: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos