Topic summary
⁠68%1 analyzed article/video698 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Financial Analysis results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Optimism Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 11% saturation with 231 hits. Analysis detected 1,729 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,094 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠59% (6,805 of 16,558 topics). This Financial Analysis is worse (more manipulative) than 58.90% of the peer group.
Financial Analysis
Topic details
Total words: 2,094
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

59% percentile
025507510058.9% percentile
3.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.1K 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 2.7%2.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.0%3.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.3%1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 8.4%8.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.5%0.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 11.0%11.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.1%3.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.5%1.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 3.1%3.1%

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 2.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 10.0%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 11.0%, sitewide 5.3%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 8.4%, sitewide 0.5%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 6.0%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 5.2%Recency Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 2.7%Anchoring Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 4.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.9%, sitewide 3.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.8%Bandwagon: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Primacy Effect: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos