Topic summary
⁠29%2 analyzed articles/videos273 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Government Aid results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Authority, and Negativity Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 6.1% saturation with 310 hits. Analysis detected 2,948 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,108 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠19% (13,467 of 16,562 topics). This Government Aid is better (less manipulative) than 81.30% of the peer group.
Government Aid
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 5,108
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

19% percentile
025507510018.7% percentile
1.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.1K 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 6.1%6.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.0%4.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.9%1.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.1%2.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.1%4.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.3%1.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.7%1.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.3%1.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.7%3.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%

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 6.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.2%, sitewide 3.3%Loss Aversion: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 0.0%Begging the Question: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos