Topic summary
⁠0%5 analyzed articles/videos3,642 analyzed words
BS Summary: These International Negotiations results contain 47 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Optimism Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.7% saturation with 1,767 hits. Analysis detected 14,792 faulty-reasoning hits from 22,912 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (15,755 of 16,562 topics). This International Negotiations is better (less manipulative) than 95.10% of the peer group.
International Negotiations
Topic details
Total words: 22,912
Article count: 5
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

5% percentile
02550751004.9% percentile
1.4% BS Score5 analyzed articles22.9K 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 7.1%7.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.1%4.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.7%7.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.8%3.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.7%0.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.6%0.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.1%3.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.4%0.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.8%2.8%

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 7.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.9%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos