Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video636 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Public Sector Workers results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Self-Serving Bias, and Optimism Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 12% saturation with 305 hits. Analysis detected 1,735 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,544 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (8,768 of 15,650 topics). This Public Sector Workers is better (less manipulative) than 56.00% of the peer group.
Public Sector Workers
Topic details
Total words: 2,544
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

44% percentile
025507510044.0% percentile
2.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.9%3.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 12.0%12.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 9.0%9.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.8%2.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.5%1.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.2%2.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.6%0.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.8%0.8%

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 12.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 9.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 3.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 4.0%False Dilemma: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Begging the Question: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos