Topic summary
⁠29%2 analyzed articles/videos2,531 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Texas Floods results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Appeal to Emotion, and Hindsight Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.7% saturation with 436 hits. Analysis detected 4,105 faulty-reasoning hits from 7,593 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠12% (14,664 of 16,560 topics). This Texas Floods is better (less manipulative) than 88.60% of the peer group.
Texas Floods
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 7,593
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

11% percentile
025507510011.4% percentile
1.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles7.6K 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 1.9%1.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 5.7%5.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 4.1%4.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.0%1.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.2%1.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.0%1.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.3%1.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.3%1.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%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 1.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 5.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3%Hindsight Bias: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.5%, sitewide 0.8%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Indoctrination: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.0%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos