Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos
BS Summary: These Israel Iran Relations results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Self-Serving Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 15.8% saturation with 488 hits. Analysis detected 2,240 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,087 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Israel Iran Relations is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Israel Iran Relations
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
⁠0%Israel Iran Relations (selected)0%
Topic details
Total words: 3,087
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.1K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 1.3%1.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.6%0.6%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 15.8%15.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.4%0.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.2%3.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.2%2.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 8.0%8.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.4%4.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.6%2.6%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 2.2%2.2%

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 15.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Topic 9.7%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 8.1%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 8.0%, sitewide 3.7%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 1.1%Bandwagon: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.8%False Dilemma: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Middle Ground: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 0.0%No True Scotsman: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 0.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos