Topic summary
⁠13%4 analyzed articles/videos6,110 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Financial Aid results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Loss Aversion, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.5% saturation with 1,415 hits. Analysis detected 12,123 faulty-reasoning hits from 25,799 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠3% (16,089 of 16,512 topics). This Financial Aid is better (less manipulative) than 97.40% of the peer group.
Financial Aid
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 25,799
Article count: 4
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

3% percentile
02550751002.6% percentile
1.2% BS Score4 analyzed articles25.8K 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 5.4%5.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.0%2.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 5.5%5.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.9%0.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.6%0.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.3%0.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.7%1.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.5%0.5%

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 5.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 2.5%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Indoctrination: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 0.0%Bandwagon: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos