Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,263 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Federal Reserve Independence results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and False Dilemma, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 13.7% saturation with 692 hits. Analysis detected 3,087 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,052 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (14,785 of 16,562 topics). This Federal Reserve Independence is better (less manipulative) than 89.30% of the peer group.
Federal Reserve Independence
Topic details
Total words: 5,052
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

11% percentile
025507510010.7% percentile
1.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.1K 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 3.4%3.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.6%3.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.9%0.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.1%1.1%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 13.7%13.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.2%0.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%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 3.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 13.7%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.7%False Dilemma: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 1.4%Begging the Question: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 1.7%Hindsight Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos