Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,630 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Urban Agriculture results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Framing Effect, and Hasty Generalization, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 9.8% saturation with 640 hits. Analysis detected 5,537 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,520 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠30% (11,168 of 15,772 topics). This Urban Agriculture is better (less manipulative) than 70.80% of the peer group.
Urban Agriculture
Topic details
Total words: 6,520
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

29% percentile
025507510029.2% percentile
2.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles6.5K 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 7.8%7.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.6%3.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.2%3.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.8%0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Topic 5.0%5.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 9.2%9.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 9.8%9.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Topic 0.7%0.7%

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 7.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Topic 9.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 9.2%, sitewide 6.0%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 6.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 4.9%, sitewide 5.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 0.5%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.0%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 1.1%Bandwagon: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos