Topic summary
⁠0%3 analyzed articles/videos5,898 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Forest results contain 44 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 6.8% saturation with 1,462 hits. Analysis detected 12,869 faulty-reasoning hits from 21,474 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (14,510 of 15,142 topics). This Forest is better (less manipulative) than 95.80% of the peer group.
Forest
Topic details
Total words: 21,474
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

4% percentile
02550751004.2% percentile
1.4% BS Score3 analyzed articles21.5K 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 3.1%3.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.8%6.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.8%3.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.0%4.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.3%2.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.9%0.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.5%2.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 0.2%0.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.8%4.8%

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 3.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.4%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 1.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos