Topic summary
69% 27 analyzed articles/videos 16,978 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Personal Finance results contain 49 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Optimism Bias , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.4% saturation with 6,658 hits . Analysis detected 63,116 faulty-reasoning hits from 79,407 analyzed words across 27 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 11% (13,825 of 15,447 topics). This Personal Finance is better (less manipulative) than 89.50% of the peer group. Personal Finance
Topic details
Total words: 79,407
Article count: 27
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
11% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 10.5% percentile 1.6% BS Score27 analyzed articles79.4K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 7.3% 7.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 4.1% 4.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 8.4% 8.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 4.2% 4.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.5% 0.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 0.7% 0.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 2.1% 2.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 4.3% 4.3% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Topic 4.3% 4.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 4.7% 4.7% 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 7.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 8.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 4.6% Indoctrination: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 0.0% Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 2.5% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.0%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst