Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video934 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Lindsey Vonn results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Appeal to Authority, and Hindsight Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 13.6% saturation with 380 hits. Analysis detected 4,259 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,802 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4% and a BS Rank of ⁠67% (5,475 of 16,562 topics). This Lindsey Vonn is worse (more manipulative) than 66.90% of the peer group.
Lindsey Vonn
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 2,802
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

67% percentile
025507510066.9% percentile
4.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.8K 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 2.4%2.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 13.6%13.6%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Topic 10.3%10.3%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Topic 8.8%8.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 9.3%9.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 13.2%13.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.3%1.3%Actor-Observer BiasSitewide 0.6%Topic 4.2%4.2%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.5%0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Topic 0.4%0.4%

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 13.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 19.2%Availability Heuristic: Topic 13.2%, sitewide 9.1%Appeal to Authority: Topic 10.6%, sitewide 11.1%Hindsight Bias: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 1.4%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 9.3%, sitewide 3.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 8.8%, sitewide 2.2%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 7.9%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 6.0%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 4.6%In-Group Bias: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 5.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.7%, sitewide 3.3%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 0.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 2.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.9%Bandwagon: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos