Topic summary
⁠0%5 analyzed articles/videos1,417 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Self Driving Cars results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Halo Effect, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 3.4% saturation with 1,256 hits. Analysis detected 9,311 faulty-reasoning hits from 37,379 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠1% (16,552 of 16,562 topics). This Self Driving Cars is better (less manipulative) than 99.90% of the peer group.
Self Driving Cars
Topic details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.1% percentile
0.6% BS Score5 analyzed articles37.4K 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 3.4%3.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.7%0.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.6%1.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.3%1.3%

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 3.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.0%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos