Topic summary
⁠15%1 analyzed article/video1,097 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Inter Agency Cooperation results contain 21 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Confirmation Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 6.4% saturation with 283 hits. Analysis detected 1,408 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,388 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠20% (18,106 of 22,519 topics). This Inter Agency Cooperation is better (less manipulative) than 80.40% of the peer group.
Inter Agency Cooperation
Topic details
Total words: 4,388
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

20% percentile
025507510019.6% percentile
1.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.4K 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 1.6%1.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.5%6.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.1%5.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.6%0.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.0%2.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.6%0.6%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.1%0.1%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.4%0.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.2%1.2%

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 1.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.5%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos