Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These St Louis Battlehawks results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Optimism Bias, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 9.9% saturation with 106 hits. Analysis detected 878 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,076 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 16,562 topics). This St Louis Battlehawks is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
St Louis Battlehawks
Topic details
Total words: 1,076
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.1K 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 2.8%2.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 1.9%1.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.8%2.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 4.7%4.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 9.8%9.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 4.5%4.5%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 1.4%1.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 7.5%7.5%

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 2.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Topic 9.8%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 9.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 8.6%, sitewide 6.9%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 7.5%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 7.5%, sitewide 5.3%Optimism Bias: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 6.0%Indoctrination: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 0.0%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 3.7%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 4.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 3.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.8%, sitewide 0.8%False Dilemma: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 1.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.2%Recency Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 1.9%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 0.0%Composition/Division: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos