Topic summary
⁠0%3 analyzed articles/videos2,997 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tulsi Gabbard results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Confirmation Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 14.8% saturation with 1,378 hits. Analysis detected 17,468 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,323 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠71% (4,653 of 15,689 topics). This Tulsi Gabbard is worse (more manipulative) than 70.30% of the peer group.
Tulsi Gabbard
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 9,323
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

70% percentile
025507510070.3% percentile
4.4% BS Score3 analyzed articles9.3K 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 14.8%14.8%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 11.8%11.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 13.1%13.1%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Topic 6.0%6.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 14.6%14.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.2%2.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 6.6%6.6%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Topic 4.8%4.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.7%1.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 8.9%8.9%

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 14.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 14.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 13.2%, sitewide 15.9%Confirmation Bias: Topic 13.1%, sitewide 7.5%Ad Hominem: Topic 11.8%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 9.1%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 4.6%Hasty Generalization: Topic 8.7%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 6.9%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 3.7%Halo Effect: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 6.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 6.3%, sitewide 3.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 1.4%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 5.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 3.1%Burden of Proof: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 0.4%Slippery Slope: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 1.7%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 4.0%, sitewide 0.8%Horn Effect: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 1.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos