Topic summary
⁠94%4 analyzed articles/videos2,383 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Food Insecurity results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 29.6% saturation with 3,758 hits. Analysis detected 17,534 faulty-reasoning hits from 12,681 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠59% (6,514 of 15,769 topics). This Food Insecurity is worse (more manipulative) than 58.70% of the peer group.
Food Insecurity
Topic ranking list
Topic details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

59% percentile
025507510058.7% percentile
3.5% BS Score4 analyzed articles12.7K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 29.6%29.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 5.3%5.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 21.5%21.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.7%2.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 21.0%21.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.0%2.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.3%1.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.9%2.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.3%1.3%

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%Negativity Bias: Topic 29.6%, sitewide 19.2%Framing Effect: Topic 21.5%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 21.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 6.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 6.3%, sitewide 3.3%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 5.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Pessimism Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 1.9%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.1%Loss Aversion: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 2.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Negativity BiasSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos