Topic summary
⁠4%3 analyzed articles/videos1,996 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hemp Industry results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Hasty Generalization, and Negativity Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 860 hits. Analysis detected 5,848 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,713 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (14,883 of 16,562 topics). This Hemp Industry is better (less manipulative) than 89.90% of the peer group.
Hemp Industry
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 9,713
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

10% percentile
025507510010.1% percentile
1.6% BS Score3 analyzed articles9.7K 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 8.8%8.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.8%3.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.5%1.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 8.7%8.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.5%0.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.7%0.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.9%2.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.3%1.3%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.8%0.8%

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 8.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.1%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 1.9%Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos