Topic summary
⁠54%1 analyzed article/video909 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Mummies results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 11.8% saturation with 323 hits. Analysis detected 2,779 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,727 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (8,205 of 16,562 topics). This Mummies is worse (more manipulative) than 50.50% of the peer group.
Mummies
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠51%Mummies (selected)3%
⁠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%
Topic details
Total words: 2,727
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

51% percentile
025507510050.5% percentile
3.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.7K 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 6.8%6.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.3%2.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.1%8.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.4%0.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 10.1%10.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.7%0.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.0%2.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.7%4.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.9%3.9%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%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 6.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 11.8%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 10.1%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 8.2%, sitewide 7.5%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 5.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 2.7%Hindsight Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 0.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.3%, sitewide 0.8%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.8%, sitewide 3.3%False Dilemma: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 1.5%Recency Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos