Topic summary
⁠6%1 analyzed article/video178 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Oldenburg results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and Pessimism Bias, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 7.1% saturation with 38 hits. Analysis detected 153 faulty-reasoning hits from 534 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (4,255 of 16,562 topics). This Oldenburg is worse (more manipulative) than 74.30% of the peer group.
Oldenburg
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 534
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

74% percentile
025507510074.3% percentile
4.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles534 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 5.2%5.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.7%6.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.8%2.8%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Topic 3.8%3.8%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Topic 3.0%3.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 7.1%7.1%

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 5.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 19.2%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 7.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 1.9%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 2.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos