Topic summary
60% 28 analyzed articles/videos 16,040 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Us Senate Elections results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Biased Writer Voice , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.1% saturation with 7,995 hits . Analysis detected 77,401 faulty-reasoning hits from 79,307 analyzed words across 28 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 19% (13,570 of 16,559 topics). This Us Senate Elections is better (less manipulative) than 81.90% of the peer group. Us Senate Elections
Topic details
Total words: 79,307
Article count: 28
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
18% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 18.1% percentile 1.8% BS Score28 analyzed articles79.3K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 9.2% 9.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 5.6% 5.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 10.1% 10.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 2.3% 2.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 3.4% 3.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 2.6% 2.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 2.8% 2.8% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 2.1% 2.1% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Topic 0.7% 0.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 4.2% 4.2% 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 9.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 10.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 6.9% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 5.3% Halo Effect: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.1%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 3.1% Recency Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 2.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 1.5% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst