Topic summary
⁠65%2 analyzed articles/videos667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Food Affordability results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Optimism Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 10.8% saturation with 677 hits. Analysis detected 5,668 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,294 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠47% (8,512 of 15,845 topics). This Food Affordability is better (less manipulative) than 53.70% of the peer group.
Food Affordability
Topic details
Total words: 6,294
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

46% percentile
025507510046.3% percentile
2.8% BS Score2 analyzed articles6.3K 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 10.8%10.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 5.6%5.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.9%5.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 10.5%10.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.9%2.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.9%4.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.1%1.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.7%3.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.1%1.1%

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 10.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 11.1%Anchoring Bias: Topic 10.5%, sitewide 4.0%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 9.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 8.8%, sitewide 6.0%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 5.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%False Dilemma: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.5%Recency Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos