Topic summary
60% 15 analyzed articles/videos 5,741 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Financial Markets results contain 51 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Hasty Generalization , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.9% saturation with 4,406 hits . Analysis detected 44,404 faulty-reasoning hits from 40,443 analyzed words across 15 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of 29% (11,828 of 16,534 topics). This Financial Markets is better (less manipulative) than 71.50% of the peer group. Financial Markets
Topic details
Total words: 40,443
Article count: 15
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
29% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 28.5% percentile 2.2% BS Score15 analyzed articles40.4K 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 7.8% 7.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 5.1% 5.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 10.9% 10.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.4% 0.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 0.4% 0.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 5.5% 5.5% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 1.4% 1.4% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Topic 1.3% 1.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 5.2% 5.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Topic 8.9% 8.9% 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 7.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 10.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 9.1% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 5.3% Hasty Generalization: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 7.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.6%, sitewide 3.3% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 4.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.9%, sitewide 0.8% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.9% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.7% Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.1% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: 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