Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos2,359 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Qatar Diplomacy results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10% saturation with 939 hits. Analysis detected 6,994 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,436 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠20% (13,289 of 16,562 topics). This Qatar Diplomacy is better (less manipulative) than 80.20% of the peer group.
Qatar Diplomacy
Topic ranking list
Topic details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

20% percentile
025507510019.8% percentile
1.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles9.4K 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 8.7%8.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.0%4.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 9.9%9.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.4%2.4%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.6%1.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.1%3.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.5%2.5%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.9%0.9%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.9%2.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.5%1.5%

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 8.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 9.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos