Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video673 analyzed words
BS Summary: These University Acquisitions results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Halo Effect, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 20.4% saturation with 411 hits. Analysis detected 2,713 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,019 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠77% (3,802 of 16,562 topics). This University Acquisitions is worse (more manipulative) than 77.00% of the peer group.
University Acquisitions
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠77%University Acquisitions (selected)6%
⁠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: 2,019
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

77% percentile
025507510077.0% percentile
5.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 0.7%0.7%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 15.2%15.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 15.1%15.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 15.1%15.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.3%0.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 20.4%20.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 9.7%9.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.0%1.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.8%3.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.3%0.3%

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 20.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 9.7%, sitewide 15.9%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 15.2%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to Authority: Topic 15.1%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Topic 15.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 15.1%, sitewide 6.0%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 7.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 6.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 5.6%, sitewide 0.8%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 5.2%Unattributed Quote: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 1.1%Bandwagon: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.3%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 1.9%Loss Aversion: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.7%Actor-Observer Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.6%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos