Topic summary
31% 10 analyzed articles/videos 7,409 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Foodborne Illnesses results contain 49 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Negativity Bias , and Availability Heuristic , with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 9.2% saturation with 3,380 hits . Analysis detected 27,659 faulty-reasoning hits from 36,810 analyzed words across 10 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 9% (15,096 of 16,562 topics). This Foodborne Illnesses is better (less manipulative) than 91.10% of the peer group. Foodborne Illnesses
Topic details
Total words: 36,810
Article count: 10
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
9% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 8.9% percentile 1.5% BS Score10 analyzed articles36.8K 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 4.2% 4.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 3.3% 3.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 7.6% 7.6% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Topic 9.2% 9.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.1% 0.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 1.7% 1.7% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 0.9% 0.9% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 2.8% 2.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 5.1% 5.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% 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% Framing Effect: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 11.1% Indoctrination: Topic 9.2%, sitewide 0.0% Availability Heuristic: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 0.8% Bandwagon: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst