Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video628 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Geno Auriemma results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Appeal to Emotion, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 57.9% saturation with 1,455 hits. Analysis detected 5,108 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,512 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠73% (4,117 of 15,149 topics). This Geno Auriemma is worse (more manipulative) than 72.80% of the peer group.
Geno Auriemma
Topic details
Total words: 2,512
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

73% percentile
025507510072.8% percentile
4.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 57.9%57.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 4.1%4.1%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 16.4%16.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.5%2.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 13.7%13.7%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.7%0.7%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Topic 6.2%6.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.3%0.3%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 7.0%7.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 57.9%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 13.7%, sitewide 19.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 16.4%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 14.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 11.1%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 7.5%Recency Bias: Topic 7.0%, sitewide 2.7%In-Group Bias: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 6.7%Straw Man: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 0.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 3.7%Bandwagon: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 2.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 4.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 4.3%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 2.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 0.0%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 4.0%Indoctrination: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 0.0%Horn Effect: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 1.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos