Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These National Flag Debate results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Confirmation Bias, and Indoctrination, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 24.7% saturation with 89 hits. Analysis detected 326 faulty-reasoning hits from 360 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This National Flag Debate is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
National Flag Debate
Topic details
Total words: 360
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles360 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 20.6%20.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.2%7.2%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 10.3%10.3%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 10.3%10.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 10.3%10.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 24.7%24.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 7.2%7.2%

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 24.7%, sitewide 26.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 20.6%, sitewide 0.8%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 19.2%Confirmation Bias: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 7.5%Indoctrination: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 0.0%Unattributed Quote: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 1.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 5.3%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos