Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video830 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Los Angeles Landmarks results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Optimism Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 10.1% saturation with 335 hits. Analysis detected 3,432 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,320 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠54% (7,756 of 16,562 topics). This Los Angeles Landmarks is worse (more manipulative) than 53.20% of the peer group.
Los Angeles Landmarks
Topic details
Total words: 3,320
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

53% percentile
025507510053.2% percentile
3.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.3K 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 2.3%2.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.3%7.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.1%4.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 10.1%10.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.3%1.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.5%2.5%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 5.4%5.4%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%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 2.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 9.3%, sitewide 11.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 10.1%, sitewide 0.8%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 8.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 6.0%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 7.5%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.9%, sitewide 5.3%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 6.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 0.5%Anecdotal: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 0.0%Status Quo Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 3.3%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.9%Recency Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.5%Red Herring: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 0.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos