Topic summary
ā 0%2 analyzed articles/videos1,857 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sfusd results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Negativity Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 35.9% saturation with 1,744 hits. Analysis detected 7,270 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,863 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.5% and a BS Rank of ā 73% (4,545 of 16,559 topics). This Sfusd is worse (more manipulative) than 72.60% of the peer group.
Sfusd
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
ā 0%Uber1%
ā 0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
ā 0%Opera1%
ā 0%Holocaust1%
ā 0%Privacy Policy1%
ā 73%Sfusd (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: 4,863
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

73% percentile
025507510072.6% percentile
4.5% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.9K 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 35.9%35.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 13.5%13.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.2%2.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.8%1.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 8.0%8.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 0.6%0.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 2.6%2.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 2.2%2.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%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 35.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 13.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 17.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 8.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 10.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 8.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 6.0%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 4.6%Bandwagon: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 2.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 4.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 2.5%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.3%Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.6%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos