Topic summary
ā 27%1 analyzed article/video549 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Senate Appropriations Committee results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Slippery Slope, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 7.3% saturation with 160 hits. Analysis detected 1,152 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,196 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ā 43% (12,976 of 22,497 topics). This Senate Appropriations Committee is better (less manipulative) than 57.70% of the peer group.
Senate Appropriations Committee
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 2,196
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

42% percentile
025507510042.3% percentile
2.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.2K 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 7.3%7.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.1%6.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.2%5.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.1%1.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.0%2.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.8%1.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.1%1.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.5%2.5%

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 7.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 5.3%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.7%Slippery Slope: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.5%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.9%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 0.0%Hindsight Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 1.4%Unattributed Quote: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.1%Sunk Cost Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 0.3%Red Herring: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 0.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos