Topic summary
82% 15 analyzed articles/videos 8,863 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Congressional Hearings results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Appeal to Emotion , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 11.9% saturation with 4,882 hits . Analysis detected 42,831 faulty-reasoning hits from 40,982 analyzed words across 15 articles, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of 36% (14,456 of 22,488 topics). This Congressional Hearings is better (less manipulative) than 64.30% of the peer group. Congressional Hearings
Topic details
Total words: 40,982
Article count: 15
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
36% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 35.7% percentile 2.0% BS Score15 analyzed articles41K 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 6.1% 6.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 9.2% 9.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 1.5% 1.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 6.5% 6.5% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Topic 11.9% 11.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 0.5% 0.5% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 0.6% 0.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 3.8% 3.8% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Topic 6.5% 6.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 2.6% 2.6% 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 6.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 9.2%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 11.9%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 7.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.7% Ad Hominem: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 2.2% Optimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.6% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 1.4% Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 2.7% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 3.1% Recency Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.0% Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst