Publication summary
12% 31 analyzed articles/videos 16,385 analyzed words
BS Summary: These ARLnow results contain 49 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Halo Effect , and Framing Effect , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 3.3% saturation with 2,243 hits . Analysis detected 25,616 faulty-reasoning hits from 67,544 analyzed words across 31 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.8% and a BS Rank of 6% (515 of 548 publications). This ARLnow is better (less manipulative) than 94.00% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 67,544
Article count: 31
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
6% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 6.0% percentile 0.8% BS Score31 analyzed articles67.5K 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% Publication 2.1% 2.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 3.0% 3.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 2.0% 2.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 1.9% 1.9% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 1.7% 1.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 1.8% 1.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 1.2% 1.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.0% 1.0% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Publication 0.9% 0.9% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 1.2% 1.2% 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: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 1.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 3.3%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.1%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst