Topic summary
50% 6 analyzed articles/videos 3,954 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Diabetes results contain 41 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Authority , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 9.1% saturation with 1,311 hits . Analysis detected 11,679 faulty-reasoning hits from 14,462 analyzed words across 6 articles, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of 23% (12,878 of 16,562 topics). This Diabetes is better (less manipulative) than 77.80% of the peer group. Diabetes
Topic details
Total words: 14,462
Article count: 6
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
22% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 22.2% percentile 2.0% BS Score6 analyzed articles14.5K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 6.8% 6.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 4.1% 4.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 9.1% 9.1% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Topic 6.8% 6.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.5% 0.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 5.1% 5.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 3.3% 3.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 1.3% 1.3% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Topic 0.7% 0.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 3.7% 3.7% 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 6.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.9% Indoctrination: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 0.0% Halo Effect: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.6%, sitewide 3.3% Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.0%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst