Topic summary
40% 15 analyzed articles/videos 5,646 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Environmental Protection results contain 50 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 9.5% saturation with 3,730 hits . Analysis detected 31,860 faulty-reasoning hits from 39,200 analyzed words across 15 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 11% (13,907 of 15,613 topics). This Environmental Protection is better (less manipulative) than 89.10% of the peer group. Environmental Protection
Topic details
Total words: 39,200
Article count: 15
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
11% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 10.9% percentile 1.6% BS Score15 analyzed articles39.2K 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 6.0% 6.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 9.5% 9.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 9.2% 9.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 2.9% 2.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 1.8% 1.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 2.9% 2.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 2.4% 2.4% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Topic 0.5% 0.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 4.1% 4.1% 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 6.0%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 9.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 9.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.5% Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.9% Bandwagon: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst