Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video623 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hillary-Clinton results contain 13 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Halo Effect, and In-Group Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 12.3% saturation with 153 hits. Analysis detected 1,002 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,246 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 6.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠83% (2,843 of 15,988 topics). This Hillary-Clinton is worse (more manipulative) than 82.20% of the peer group.
Hillary-Clinton
Topic ranking list
Topic details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

82% percentile
025507510082.2% percentile
6.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.2K 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 5.9%5.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 12.3%12.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 10.8%10.8%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 6.1%6.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 11.7%11.7%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 6.1%6.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.8%2.8%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%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 5.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 12.3%, sitewide 19.2%Hasty Generalization: Topic 11.7%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Topic 10.8%, sitewide 6.7%In-Group Bias: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 6.9%Ad Hominem: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 2.2%Recency Bias: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 2.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 6.0%Pessimism Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 1.9%Unattributed Quote: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 1.1%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.4%Horn Effect: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos