Topic summary
17% 26 analyzed articles/videos 11,510 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Foodborne Illness results contain 49 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Availability Heuristic , and Confirmation Bias , with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 7.1% saturation with 3,199 hits . Analysis detected 33,141 faulty-reasoning hits from 44,928 analyzed words across 26 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 9% (15,224 of 16,562 topics). This Foodborne Illness is better (less manipulative) than 91.90% of the peer group. Foodborne Illness
Topic details
Total words: 44,928
Article count: 26
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
8% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 8.1% percentile 1.5% BS Score26 analyzed articles44.9K 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 4.1% 4.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 2.7% 2.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 6.5% 6.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.4% 0.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 1.2% 1.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 2.7% 2.7% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 1.5% 1.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 4.7% 4.7% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Topic 1.1% 1.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 7.1% 7.1% 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 4.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.3%, sitewide 3.3% Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.7% Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.1% Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Indoctrination: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.0% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst