Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video418 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Food Waste Reduction results contain 21 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Framing Effect, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 13.9% saturation with 232 hits. Analysis detected 1,710 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,672 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (4,154 of 16,562 topics). This Food Waste Reduction is worse (more manipulative) than 74.90% of the peer group.
Food Waste Reduction
Topic details
Total words: 1,672
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

75% percentile
025507510074.9% percentile
4.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.7K 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 9.5%9.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.3%6.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.9%3.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 9.3%9.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 13.9%13.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 11.0%11.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 6.1%6.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.2%4.2%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 4.4%4.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.6%3.6%

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 9.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 15.9%Hasty Generalization: Topic 13.9%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Authority: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 11.0%, sitewide 5.3%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 9.3%, sitewide 3.3%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 4.6%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 0.0%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 4.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 0.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.3%, sitewide 0.8%Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.1%False Dilemma: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 1.9%Burden of Proof: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.4%Indoctrination: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos