Topic summary
⁠22%1 analyzed article/video1,217 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Vision Science results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Burden of Proof, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 9.9% saturation with 360 hits. Analysis detected 2,622 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,651 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠42% (9,759 of 16,562 topics). This Vision Science is better (less manipulative) than 58.90% of the peer group.
Vision Science
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 3,651
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

41% percentile
025507510041.1% percentile
2.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 2.6%2.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.9%3.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.7%1.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.8%0.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.4%2.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 9.3%9.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.9%0.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.3%1.3%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%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 2.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 9.9%, sitewide 8.1%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 9.3%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.2%Burden of Proof: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 0.4%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 4.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 3.6%, sitewide 0.8%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%False Dilemma: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Appeal to Nature: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 0.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 1.7%Middle Ground: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 0.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos