Topic summary
⁠22%3 analyzed articles/videos4,397 analyzed words
BS Summary: These China's Foreign Policy results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Framing Effect, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 4.6% saturation with 1,005 hits. Analysis detected 7,540 faulty-reasoning hits from 21,852 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠2% (24,096 of 24,545 topics). This China's Foreign Policy is better (less manipulative) than 98.20% of the peer group.
China's Foreign Policy
Topic details
Total words: 21,852
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

2% percentile
02550751001.8% percentile
0.8% BS Score3 analyzed articles21.9K 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 3.8%3.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.8%0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.6%4.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.6%0.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.8%0.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.1%0.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.3%0.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.3%0.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.8%0.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.7%3.7%

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 3.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos