Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video237 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Housing Market Affordability results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Optimism Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 47.5% saturation with 338 hits. Analysis detected 1,389 faulty-reasoning hits from 711 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 24.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠100% (139 of 16,562 topics). This Housing Market Affordability is worse (more manipulative) than 99.20% of the peer group.
Housing Market Affordability
Topic details
Total words: 711
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

99% percentile
025507510099.2% percentile
24.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles711 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 38.5%38.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 35.9%35.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 24.2%24.2%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 47.5%47.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 24.2%24.2%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 15.8%15.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 5.8%5.8%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Topic 3.5%3.5%

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 47.5%, sitewide 26.9%Anchoring Bias: Topic 38.5%, sitewide 4.0%Optimism Bias: Topic 35.9%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Authority: Topic 24.2%, sitewide 11.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 24.2%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 15.8%, sitewide 2.7%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 8.1%Status Quo Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos