Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video449 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Traffic Crash Investigation results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Anchoring Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.1% saturation with 419 hits. Analysis detected 2,492 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,347 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 8% and a BS Rank of ⁠89% (1,848 of 16,562 topics). This Traffic Crash Investigation is worse (more manipulative) than 88.80% of the peer group.
Traffic Crash Investigation
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠89%Traffic Crash Investigation (selected)9%
⁠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: 1,347
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

89% percentile
025507510088.8% percentile
8.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.3K 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 6.2%6.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 24.4%24.4%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 16.0%16.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 31.1%31.1%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Topic 13.4%13.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 19.5%19.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 13.0%13.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Special PleadingSitewide 0.3%Topic 5.8%5.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.7%0.7%

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%Negativity Bias: Topic 31.1%, sitewide 19.2%Framing Effect: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 26.9%Halo Effect: Topic 24.4%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Topic 19.5%, sitewide 11.1%Anchoring Bias: Topic 16.0%, sitewide 4.0%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 13.7%, sitewide 15.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 13.4%, sitewide 2.7%In-Group Bias: Topic 13.0%, sitewide 6.9%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.0%Special Pleading: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 0.3%Horn Effect: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 1.0%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 1.4%Primacy Effect: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.9%, sitewide 0.8%Hindsight Bias: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 3.1%Status Quo Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 2.2%Loss Aversion: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.5%Red Herring: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.7%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 0.6%Blind-Spot Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 0.2%Negativity BiasSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos