Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,007 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Foraging Safety results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Loss Aversion, and Availability Heuristic, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 19.5% saturation with 581 hits. Analysis detected 4,859 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,974 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠82% (3,107 of 16,562 topics). This Foraging Safety is worse (more manipulative) than 81.20% of the peer group.
Foraging Safety
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 2,974
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

81% percentile
025507510081.2% percentile
5.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3K 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 8.3%8.3%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Topic 12.9%12.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.7%0.7%Appeal to NatureSitewide 0.2%Topic 5.5%5.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 6.6%6.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 8.7%8.7%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Topic 6.9%6.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 19.5%19.5%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Topic 5.3%5.3%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Topic 4.7%4.7%

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 8.3%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 19.5%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 19.4%, sitewide 19.2%Loss Aversion: Topic 12.9%, sitewide 2.5%Availability Heuristic: Topic 11.3%, sitewide 9.1%Appeal to Authority: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 8.7%, sitewide 4.6%Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 6.9%, sitewide 6.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 6.9%, sitewide 3.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Nature: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 0.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 1.9%Anecdotal: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 4.0%Slippery Slope: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 1.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos