Topic summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos2,152 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Wimbledon results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Negativity Bias, and Halo Effect, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 11.5% saturation with 987 hits. Analysis detected 6,783 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,608 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠31% (11,561 of 16,562 topics). This Wimbledon is better (less manipulative) than 69.80% of the peer group.
Wimbledon
Topic ranking list
Topic details
Total words: 8,608
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

30% percentile
025507510030.2% percentile
2.2% BS Score2 analyzed articles8.6K 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 11.5%11.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.8%1.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.8%7.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.5%1.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.7%3.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 10.2%10.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.7%1.7%

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 11.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 10.2%, sitewide 5.3%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 5.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 0.5%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 2.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos