Topic summary
ā 0%1 analyzed article/video1,725 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Wellcare results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 3.9% saturation with 271 hits. Analysis detected 2,324 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,900 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.1% and a BS Rank of ā 2% (16,360 of 16,562 topics). This Wellcare is better (less manipulative) than 98.80% of the peer group.
Wellcare
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
ā 0%Uber1%
ā 0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
ā 0%Opera1%
ā 0%Holocaust1%
ā 0%Privacy Policy1%
ā 2%Wellcare (selected)2%
ā 100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
ā 100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
ā 100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
ā 100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
ā 100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 6,900
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

1% percentile
02550751001.2% percentile
1.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles6.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0ā€“50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 0.6%0.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.9%2.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.1%2.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.8%2.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.4%0.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.8%0.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.4%0.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.1%0.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.9%3.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.0%3.0%

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 0.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.0%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.1%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 1.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos