Topic summary
69% 5 analyzed articles/videos 4,712 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Beijing results contain 45 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Biased Writer Voice , and Hasty Generalization , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 10% saturation with 1,888 hits . Analysis detected 15,329 faulty-reasoning hits from 18,848 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 32% (16,508 of 23,962 topics). This Beijing is better (less manipulative) than 68.90% of the peer group. Beijing
Topic details
Total words: 18,848
Article count: 5
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
31% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 31.1% percentile 1.8% BS Score5 analyzed articles18.8K 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 10.0% 10.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 1.8% 1.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 9.1% 9.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 3.8% 3.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 2.6% 2.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.8% 0.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 2.6% 2.6% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Topic 0.8% 0.8% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 3.7% 3.7% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Topic 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: Topic 10.0%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 5.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.9% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 6.8%, sitewide 5.3% Halo Effect: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Unattributed Quote: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 1.1% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.6%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst