Topic summary
⁠76%3 analyzed articles/videos1,659 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tucson results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 17.6% saturation with 878 hits. Analysis detected 4,794 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,977 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠57% (6,863 of 15,775 topics). This Tucson is worse (more manipulative) than 56.50% of the peer group.

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

57% percentile
025507510056.5% percentile
3.3% BS Score3 analyzed articles5K 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 9.0%9.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.4%6.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 17.6%17.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.9%1.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.4%0.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.1%2.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 11.8%11.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.2%4.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 5.5%5.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 0.5%0.5%

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 9.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 17.6%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 11.8%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 5.9%, sitewide 3.7%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 4.6%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos