Topic summary
⁠0%3 analyzed articles/videos2,860 analyzed words
BS Summary: These St Louis Politics results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Framing Effect, and Self-Serving Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 9.5% saturation with 862 hits. Analysis detected 8,411 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,103 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠34% (10,942 of 16,562 topics). This St Louis Politics is better (less manipulative) than 66.10% of the peer group.
St Louis Politics
Topic details
Total words: 9,103
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

34% percentile
025507510033.9% percentile
2.3% BS Score3 analyzed articles9.1K 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 7.6%7.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.9%4.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 9.5%9.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.0%1.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.5%3.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.7%4.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.7%1.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 3.3%3.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 7.8%7.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 4.8%4.8%

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 7.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 9.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 3.7%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.7%Slippery Slope: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 2.2%Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.6%Ad Hominem: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos