Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Royal Family During Wwii results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 12.3% saturation with 671 hits. Analysis detected 4,954 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,436 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This Royal Family During Wwii is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Royal Family During Wwii
Topic details
Total words: 5,436
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.4K 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 9.4%9.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.2%7.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 7.1%7.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.2%1.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.0%4.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 12.3%12.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 7.1%7.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 2.1%2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 3.9%3.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 5.2%5.2%

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 9.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 15.9%Confirmation Bias: Topic 12.3%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 8.1%Halo Effect: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.7%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 4.6%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 5.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.9%, sitewide 0.8%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.7%Burden of Proof: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 0.4%Bandwagon: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.0%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos