Topic summary
ā 44%1 analyzed article/video380 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Senate Appointments results contain 19 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 15.3% saturation with 232 hits. Analysis detected 1,252 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,520 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.3% and a BS Rank of ā 71% (4,846 of 16,562 topics). This Senate Appointments is worse (more manipulative) than 70.70% of the peer group.
Senate Appointments
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
ā 0%Uber1%
ā 0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
ā 0%Opera1%
ā 0%Holocaust1%
ā 0%Privacy Policy1%
ā 71%Senate Appointments (selected)5%
ā 100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
ā 100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
ā 100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
ā 100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
ā 100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 1,520
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

71% percentile
025507510070.7% percentile
4.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0ā€“50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 8.9%8.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.0%2.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 14.1%14.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.8%1.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.3%2.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.8%1.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 2.4%2.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 2.3%2.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 5.5%5.5%

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 8.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 15.3%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Topic 14.1%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Topic 10.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.7%Bandwagon: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos