Topic summary
⁠55%1 analyzed article/video532 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Today In Chicago History results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 17.2% saturation with 275 hits. Analysis detected 1,544 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,596 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠70% (5,077 of 16,562 topics). This Today In Chicago History is worse (more manipulative) than 69.30% of the peer group.
Today In Chicago History
Topic details
Total words: 1,596
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

69% percentile
025507510069.3% percentile
4.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.6K 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 8.2%8.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 15.3%15.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 17.2%17.2%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 8.8%8.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 8.5%8.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.5%0.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.6%4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 9.7%9.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.8%2.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.6%0.6%

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 17.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 15.3%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 11.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 9.7%, sitewide 3.3%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 9.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 8.8%, sitewide 0.5%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 5.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 2.2%Recency Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.1%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.8%, sitewide 0.8%Indoctrination: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 0.0%Personal Incredulity: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 0.0%Primacy Effect: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 0.9%Burden of Proof: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos