Topic summary
⁠33%2 analyzed articles/videos1,970 analyzed words
BS Summary: These San Francisco Unicorns results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 7.3% saturation with 507 hits. Analysis detected 4,458 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,940 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠18% (13,598 of 16,562 topics). This San Francisco Unicorns is better (less manipulative) than 82.10% of the peer group.
San Francisco Unicorns
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠18%San Francisco Unicorns (selected)2%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 6,940
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

18% percentile
025507510017.9% percentile
1.8% BS Score2 analyzed articles6.9K 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 7.3%7.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 0.9%0.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.7%5.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.4%2.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.9%0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 6.1%6.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.0%2.0%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.1%0.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.7%1.7%

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 7.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 6.9%, sitewide 6.0%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 6.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 0.5%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.8%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos