Topic summary
⁠16%3 analyzed articles/videos1,848 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Industrial Pollution results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Indoctrination, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 7.8% saturation with 667 hits. Analysis detected 6,307 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,595 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠18% (13,551 of 16,476 topics). This Industrial Pollution is better (less manipulative) than 82.20% of the peer group.
Industrial Pollution
Topic details
Total words: 8,595
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

18% percentile
025507510017.8% percentile
1.8% BS Score3 analyzed articles8.6K 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 6.5%6.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 7.8%7.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.5%3.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.3%2.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.5%0.5%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 5.8%5.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.9%1.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.9%3.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.9%1.9%

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 6.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 6.0%Indoctrination: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 0.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.2%, sitewide 3.3%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos