Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos
BS Summary: These Middle East Peace Process results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Overconfidence Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 6.3% saturation with 271 hits. Analysis detected 2,432 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,281 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,559 topics). This Middle East Peace Process is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Middle East Peace Process
Topic details
Total words: 4,281
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.3K 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 6.3%6.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 5.5%5.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.4%3.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.1%1.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.6%1.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.2%0.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.0%2.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.7%0.7%

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 6.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.8%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.6%, sitewide 0.8%False Dilemma: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.5%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos