Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video69 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Risks Of Ai results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Anecdotal, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 65.2% saturation with 135 hits. Analysis detected 353 faulty-reasoning hits from 207 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 24.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠100% (141 of 16,562 topics). This Risks Of Ai is worse (more manipulative) than 99.20% of the peer group.
Risks Of Ai
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 207
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

99% percentile
025507510099.2% percentile
24.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles207 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 65.2%65.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 43.5%43.5%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 6.3%6.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 21.7%21.7%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 15.9%15.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 12.6%12.6%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 5.3%5.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Topic 65.2%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Topic 43.5%, sitewide 6.7%Framing Effect: Topic 6.3%, sitewide 26.9%Anecdotal: Topic 21.7%, sitewide 5.2%Negativity Bias: Topic 12.6%, sitewide 19.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 15.9%, sitewide 0.5%Indoctrination: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos