Topic summary
51% 8 analyzed articles/videos 566 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Imperial Family results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Negativity Bias , and In-Group Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 17.3% saturation with 938 hits . Analysis detected 6,433 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,412 analyzed words across 8 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.7% and a BS Rank of 64% (6,106 of 16,558 topics). This Imperial Family is worse (more manipulative) than 63.10% of the peer group. Imperial Family
Topic details
Total words: 5,412
Article count: 8
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
63% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 63.1% percentile 3.7% BS Score8 analyzed articles5.4K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 1.9% 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 17.3% 17.3% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Topic 13.6% 13.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 11.9% 11.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 1.5% 1.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 3.3% 3.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 3.0% 3.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Topic 5.5% 5.5% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 1.7% 1.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 7.3% 7.3% 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 17.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 11.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 13.6%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.3%, sitewide 11.1% In-Group Bias: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 6.9% Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 6.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 5.5%, sitewide 0.8% Status Quo Bias: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 2.2% Anecdotal: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Unattributed Quote: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 1.1% Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Bandwagon: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 2.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.3% False Dilemma: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.5% Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst