Topic summary
⁠59%1 analyzed article/video330 analyzed words
BS Summary: These University Of Pennsylvania results contain 17 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias, Self-Serving Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 11.2% saturation with 111 hits. Analysis detected 799 faulty-reasoning hits from 990 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (4,291 of 16,562 topics). This University Of Pennsylvania is worse (more manipulative) than 74.10% of the peer group.
University Of Pennsylvania
Topic details
Total words: 990
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

74% percentile
025507510074.1% percentile
4.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles990 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 5.7%5.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.3%4.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 11.2%11.2%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 8.3%8.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.2%2.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 4.0%4.0%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Topic 4.7%4.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 6.6%6.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Topic 4.3%4.3%

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 5.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 11.2%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to Authority: Topic 6.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 9.1%Recency Bias: Topic 8.3%, sitewide 2.7%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 6.7%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 3.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 5.3%Indoctrination: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 0.0%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 4.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 4.3%, sitewide 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 0.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos