Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos2,338 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Trade Negotiations results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Self-Serving Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 9.9% saturation with 928 hits. Analysis detected 6,033 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,352 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠26% (12,275 of 16,559 topics). This Trade Negotiations is better (less manipulative) than 74.10% of the peer group.
Trade Negotiations
Topic details
Total words: 9,352
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

26% percentile
025507510025.9% percentile
2.1% BS Score2 analyzed articles9.4K 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 9.9%9.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.9%1.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.9%7.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.1%1.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.9%1.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.9%2.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.2%0.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.1%2.1%

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 9.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 3.7%Anecdotal: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 4.0%Recency Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.1%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.5%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 1.9%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 1.9%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos