Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,351 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Singapore results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 7.5% saturation with 407 hits. Analysis detected 2,181 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,404 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠8% (15,283 of 16,562 topics). This Singapore is better (less manipulative) than 92.30% of the peer group.
Singapore
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠8%Singapore (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: 5,404
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

8% percentile
02550751007.7% percentile
1.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.4K 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 7.5%7.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.0%6.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.8%0.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.3%0.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.8%0.8%

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 7.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.5%, sitewide 3.3%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.5%, sitewide 0.8%Unattributed Quote: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 1.1%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 0.6%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos