Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos1,375 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Milan Cortina Olympics results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Self-Serving Bias, and Halo Effect, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 16.8% saturation with 696 hits. Analysis detected 4,407 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,138 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠63% (6,200 of 16,562 topics). This Milan Cortina Olympics is worse (more manipulative) than 62.60% of the peer group.
Milan Cortina Olympics
Topic details
Total words: 4,138
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

63% percentile
025507510062.6% percentile
3.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.1K 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 7.2%7.2%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 16.8%16.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 6.5%6.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.3%2.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 10.6%10.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.2%4.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 8.5%8.5%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.4%0.4%Actor-Observer BiasSitewide 0.6%Topic 3.8%3.8%

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 16.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 10.6%, sitewide 5.3%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 9.1%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 3.7%Halo Effect: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 6.7%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.0%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 0.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3%Hindsight Bias: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 2.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 1.9%Bandwagon: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.8%Primacy Effect: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos