Topic summary
ā 0%1 analyzed article/video693 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Stock Trading results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Self-Serving Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 10.5% saturation with 292 hits. Analysis detected 2,461 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,772 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.2% and a BS Rank of ā 54% (7,627 of 16,562 topics). This Stock Trading is worse (more manipulative) than 54.00% of the peer group.
Stock Trading
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
ā 0%Uber1%
ā 0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
ā 0%Opera1%
ā 0%Holocaust1%
ā 0%Privacy Policy1%
ā 54%Stock Trading (selected)4%
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: 2,772
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

54% percentile
025507510054.0% percentile
3.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.8K 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 5.0%5.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.6%8.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 6.1%6.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.6%2.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.7%0.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.5%2.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.2%1.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.2%1.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.3%1.3%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.3%0.3%

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 5.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 10.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 7.5%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 3.7%Halo Effect: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 4.8%, sitewide 3.3%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 4.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 4.0%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos