Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video3,413 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Supply Chain Disruption results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Appeal to Authority, and Negativity Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 13.5% saturation with 1,380 hits. Analysis detected 6,856 faulty-reasoning hits from 10,203 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠21% (13,191 of 16,562 topics). This Supply Chain Disruption is better (less manipulative) than 79.60% of the peer group.
Supply Chain Disruption
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠21%Supply Chain Disruption (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: 10,203
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

20% percentile
025507510020.4% percentile
1.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles10.2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.3%4.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 13.5%13.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 6.9%6.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.0%1.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.7%4.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.8%0.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.3%2.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.4%3.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.8%0.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.0%1.0%

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 13.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.5%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos