Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos195 analyzed words
BS Summary: These NATO Japan Relations results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Optimism Bias, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 42.6% saturation with 332 hits. Analysis detected 1,647 faulty-reasoning hits from 780 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 9.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠91% (1,505 of 16,562 topics). This NATO Japan Relations is worse (more manipulative) than 90.90% of the peer group.
NATO Japan Relations
Topic details
Total words: 780
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

91% percentile
025507510090.9% percentile
9.2% BS Score2 analyzed articles780 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 31.9%31.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 42.6%42.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 14.5%14.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 18.9%18.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.6%3.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Topic 8.1%8.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 7.2%7.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 14.4%14.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 11.7%11.7%

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 42.6%, sitewide 26.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 31.9%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Topic 14.4%, sitewide 19.2%Optimism Bias: Topic 18.9%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 15.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 14.5%, sitewide 0.8%Confirmation Bias: Topic 11.7%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 8.1%Begging the Question: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 1.7%Anchoring Bias: Topic 7.7%, sitewide 4.0%Unattributed Quote: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 1.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 6.9%Status Quo Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 2.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 4.6%Composition/Division: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 0.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 1.5%Indoctrination: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 0.0%Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.6%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Primacy Effect: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos