Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos3,019 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Spacs results contain 44 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.9% saturation with 718 hits. Analysis detected 8,206 faulty-reasoning hits from 12,076 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠9% (14,790 of 16,240 topics). This Spacs is better (less manipulative) than 91.10% of the peer group.
Spacs
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 12,076
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

9% percentile
02550751008.9% percentile
1.5% BS Score2 analyzed articles12.1K 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 4.9%4.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.0%6.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.7%2.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.1%2.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.2%1.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.7%3.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.4%3.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.9%2.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 2.3%2.3%

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 4.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.7%, sitewide 0.8%Recency Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos