Topic summary
⁠22%1 analyzed article/video363 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Los Padres National Forest results contain 17 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Halo Effect, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 16.1% saturation with 175 hits. Analysis detected 684 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,089 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠63% (6,159 of 16,562 topics). This Los Padres National Forest is worse (more manipulative) than 62.80% of the peer group.
Los Padres National Forest
Topic details
Total words: 1,089
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

63% percentile
025507510062.8% percentile
3.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.1K 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 0.5%0.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.9%3.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 9.8%9.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.9%3.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 16.1%16.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.6%1.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 4.0%4.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.9%1.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 2.2%2.2%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%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 0.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 16.1%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 9.8%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 4.6%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Burden of Proof: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.4%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 0.0%Indoctrination: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.6%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos