Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,398 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Naomi Osaka results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Negativity Bias, and Halo Effect, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 8.5% saturation with 475 hits. Analysis detected 3,502 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,592 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of ⁠22% (12,949 of 16,562 topics). This Naomi Osaka is better (less manipulative) than 78.20% of the peer group.
Naomi Osaka
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 5,592
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

22% percentile
025507510021.8% percentile
2.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.6K 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 8.5%8.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.7%4.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.2%2.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.5%1.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.8%0.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.5%3.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.7%2.7%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.0%2.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 3.7%3.7%

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 8.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 5.3%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 2.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 0.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.8%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.2%Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos