Topic summary
⁠62%3 analyzed articles/videos1,844 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Political Debates results contain 41 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and Ad Hominem, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 9.1% saturation with 609 hits. Analysis detected 5,382 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,722 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of ⁠22% (12,983 of 16,562 topics). This Political Debates is better (less manipulative) than 78.40% of the peer group.
Political Debates
Topic details
Total words: 6,722
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

22% percentile
025507510021.6% percentile
2.0% BS Score3 analyzed articles6.7K 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 7.8%7.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.2%8.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.4%0.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 9.1%9.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.8%2.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.3%2.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.4%0.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.3%1.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.2%0.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.5%2.5%

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 7.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.0%Ad Hominem: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 3.7%Indoctrination: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 3.1%False Dilemma: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.8%Bandwagon: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos