Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,090 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Phil Mickelson results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Anecdotal, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 16.7% saturation with 729 hits. Analysis detected 3,191 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,360 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (8,125 of 15,854 topics). This Phil Mickelson is better (less manipulative) than 51.20% of the peer group.
Phil Mickelson
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 4,360
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

49% percentile
025507510048.8% percentile
2.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.4K 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 7.9%7.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.7%4.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.4%3.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.6%0.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.6%1.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.4%3.4%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Topic 2.8%2.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 16.7%16.7%

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 7.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 16.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 7.5%Anecdotal: Topic 7.3%, sitewide 5.2%Halo Effect: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.5%, sitewide 3.3%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 0.0%Recency Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.7%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.4%Straw Man: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.8%Burden of Proof: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 0.4%Tu Quoque: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos