Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos1,291 analyzed words
BS Summary: These University Of Washington results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Anecdotal, and Optimism Bias, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 13.3% saturation with 685 hits. Analysis detected 3,352 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,164 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠39% (9,488 of 15,400 topics). This University Of Washington is better (less manipulative) than 61.60% of the peer group.
University Of Washington
Topic details
Total words: 5,164
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

38% percentile
025507510038.4% percentile
2.5% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.2K 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 3.9%3.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.7%3.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.1%1.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.6%0.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 13.3%13.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 9.7%9.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.8%1.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 1.1%1.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Topic 3.6%3.6%

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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 9.7%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Topic 13.3%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 5.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 5.3%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 3.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.9%Indoctrination: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 0.0%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.4%Burden of Proof: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 1.1%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos