Topic summary
⁠57%1 analyzed article/video6,166 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Impact Of Social Justice Movements On Academia results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Confirmation Bias, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.7% saturation with 1,984 hits. Analysis detected 14,136 faulty-reasoning hits from 18,498 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠18% (13,688 of 16,562 topics). This Impact Of Social Justice Movements On Academia is better (less manipulative) than 82.60% of the peer group.
Impact Of Social Justice Movements On Academia
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 18,498
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

17% percentile
025507510017.4% percentile
1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles18.5K 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 6.0%6.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.0%3.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 10.7%10.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.9%2.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.1%1.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.0%4.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.7%0.7%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.1%0.1%

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 6.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 10.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 8.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 5.2%Straw Man: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 0.9%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.3%Begging the Question: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 1.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 0.0%Slippery Slope: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos

A Crisis in the Humanities⁠40%
Quillette⁠64%By Paul Boghossian⁠61%7/15/2026, 6:01:45 PM