Topic summary
⁠55%2 analyzed articles/videos1,629 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Kelo V City Of New London results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Overconfidence Bias, and Framing Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 17.1% saturation with 959 hits. Analysis detected 6,078 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,623 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠48% (8,698 of 16,562 topics). This Kelo V City Of New London is better (less manipulative) than 52.50% of the peer group.
Kelo V City Of New London
Topic details
Total words: 5,623
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

48% percentile
025507510047.5% percentile
2.8% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.6K 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 8.4%8.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 17.1%17.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.7%5.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 11.1%11.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.9%0.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.4%3.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 5.9%5.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 9.4%9.4%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Topic 6.1%6.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.5%1.5%

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 8.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 11.1%, sitewide 19.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 17.1%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 9.4%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 1.4%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.7%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos