Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos728 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Government Budget results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Ad Hominem, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 16.6% saturation with 484 hits. Analysis detected 3,178 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,912 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠55% (7,483 of 16,562 topics). This Government Budget is worse (more manipulative) than 54.80% of the peer group.
Government Budget
Topic details
Total words: 2,912
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

55% percentile
025507510054.8% percentile
3.2% BS Score2 analyzed articles2.9K 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 9.6%9.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 10.9%10.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.0%1.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 14.3%14.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.0%2.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.3%1.3%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Topic 6.5%6.5%

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 9.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 14.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 16.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 11.1%Ad Hominem: Topic 10.9%, sitewide 2.2%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 2.0%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 4.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 2.5%Indoctrination: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 1.4%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos