Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,506 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Kakuma Refugee Camp results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 48.8% saturation with 2,204 hits. Analysis detected 7,703 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,518 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 6.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠84% (2,572 of 15,771 topics). This Kakuma Refugee Camp is worse (more manipulative) than 83.70% of the peer group.
Kakuma Refugee Camp
Topic details
Total words: 4,518
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

84% percentile
025507510083.7% percentile
6.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 48.8%48.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 32.8%32.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.1%0.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.0%2.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.5%1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 8.3%8.3%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.1%1.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 7.6%7.6%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Topic 5.4%5.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 3.4%3.4%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Negativity Bias: Topic 48.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 32.8%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Topic 28.1%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 11.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 8.3%, sitewide 3.3%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 6.0%Pessimism Bias: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 1.9%Anecdotal: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 3.7%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 4.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.8%Red Herring: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.5%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 0.6%Negativity BiasSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos