Topic summary
36% 14 analyzed articles/videos 8,083 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Endangered Species results contain 54 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Framing Effect , and Optimism Bias , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 7.9% saturation with 2,742 hits . Analysis detected 26,795 faulty-reasoning hits from 34,916 analyzed words across 14 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of 6% (15,536 of 16,504 topics). This Endangered Species is better (less manipulative) than 94.10% of the peer group. Endangered Species
Topic details
Total words: 34,916
Article count: 14
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
6% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 5.9% percentile 1.4% BS Score14 analyzed articles34.9K 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 5.5% 5.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 6.5% 6.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 7.8% 7.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 3.3% 3.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 2.4% 2.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 1.9% 1.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 1.1% 1.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 1.1% 1.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 3.4% 3.4% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Topic 1.4% 1.4% 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 5.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.1%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7% Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.9% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst