Topic summary
⁠8%2 analyzed articles/videos200 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Inter Tribal Relations results contain 10 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Status Quo Bias, and In-Group Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 3.6% saturation with 72 hits. Analysis detected 317 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,028 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠21% (17,566 of 21,995 topics). This Inter Tribal Relations is better (less manipulative) than 79.90% of the peer group.
Inter Tribal Relations
Topic details
Total words: 2,028
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

20% percentile
025507510020.1% percentile
1.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles2K 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 3.5%3.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.7%0.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.8%1.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.7%2.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.9%0.9%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 0.6%0.6%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Topic 0.6%0.6%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 1.4%1.4%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Topic 1.3%1.3%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%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 3.5%, sitewide 26.9%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.9%Anecdotal: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.5%Straw Man: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos