Topic summary
⁠60%1 analyzed article/video1,232 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Trump Spending Impoundment Congress Constitution results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Recency Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 18.7% saturation with 690 hits. Analysis detected 3,606 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,696 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠54% (7,697 of 16,562 topics). This Trump Spending Impoundment Congress Constitution is worse (more manipulative) than 53.50% of the peer group.
Trump Spending Impoundment Congress Constitution
Topic details
Total words: 3,696
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

54% percentile
025507510053.5% percentile
3.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 9.7%9.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.7%2.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.7%0.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.5%2.5%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.6%0.6%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 7.3%7.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 6.7%6.7%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 2.6%2.6%

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 9.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 18.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 7.5%Recency Bias: Topic 7.3%, sitewide 2.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.9%, sitewide 5.3%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 3.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 2.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 2.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 1.1%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos