Topic summary
⁠70%5 analyzed articles/videos2,333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Government Officials results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Recency Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 14.5% saturation with 727 hits. Analysis detected 5,120 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,024 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (8,464 of 16,562 topics). This Government Officials is better (less manipulative) than 51.10% of the peer group.
Government Officials
Topic details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

49% percentile
025507510048.9% percentile
2.9% BS Score4 analyzed articles5K 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 9.9%9.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.4%2.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.4%0.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.5%1.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 14.5%14.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 11.9%11.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.6%1.6%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 6.3%6.3%

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 9.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 14.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 11.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 6.7%Recency Bias: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 2.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 5.3%Ad Hominem: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 2.2%Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.9%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 0.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos