Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,220 analyzed words
BS Summary: These New York City History results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Framing Effect, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.1% saturation with 251 hits. Analysis detected 1,860 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,880 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠4% (15,928 of 16,562 topics). This New York City History is better (less manipulative) than 96.20% of the peer group.
New York City History
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠4%New York City History (selected)2%
⁠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: 4,880
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

4% percentile
02550751003.8% percentile
1.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.9K 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 3.5%3.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 5.1%5.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.3%3.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.6%0.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.2%4.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.6%0.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.6%2.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.0%2.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.2%1.2%

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 3.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Bandwagon: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.1%, sitewide 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.4%Unattributed Quote: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to Nature: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos