Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Marine Protected Areas results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Emotion, and Negativity Bias, with Pessimism Bias as the most egregious example at 6% saturation with 183 hits. Analysis detected 2,193 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,040 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Marine Protected Areas is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Marine Protected Areas
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
⁠0%Marine Protected Areas (selected)0%
Topic details
Total words: 3,040
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3K 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 3.9%3.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.9%4.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.1%5.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.6%4.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.2%2.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.2%2.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.0%1.0%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Topic 6.0%6.0%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.6%0.6%

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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 6.7%Pessimism Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 1.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 1.9%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 2.5%Slippery Slope: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.7%Bandwagon: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.5%, sitewide 0.8%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 0.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos