Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video914 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Mitchell Lama Program results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 12.9% saturation with 471 hits. Analysis detected 3,365 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,656 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of ⁠50% (8,226 of 16,343 topics). This Mitchell Lama Program is better (less manipulative) than 50.30% of the peer group.
Mitchell Lama Program
Topic details
Total words: 3,656
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

50% percentile
025507510049.7% percentile
3.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 12.9%12.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 10.1%10.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.9%0.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 8.9%8.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.8%0.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 6.8%6.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.1%1.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.3%1.3%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 6.2%6.2%

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 12.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 10.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 6.8%, sitewide 0.8%Halo Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.7%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 3.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 1.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.9%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos