Topic summary
⁠10%1 analyzed article/video721 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Election Endorsements results contain 12 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Halo Effect, and Framing Effect, with In-Group Bias as the most egregious example at 4.9% saturation with 70 hits. Analysis detected 385 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,442 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (12,968 of 23,151 topics). This Election Endorsements is better (less manipulative) than 56.00% of the peer group.
Election Endorsements
Topic details
Total words: 1,442
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

44% percentile
025507510044.0% percentile
2.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.4K 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 2.8%2.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 1.2%1.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.6%2.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.0%1.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.0%4.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.8%2.8%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 0.5%0.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 4.8%4.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 1.9%1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%

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 2.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos