Topic summary
⁠27%3 analyzed articles/videos1,738 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Detroit Tigers results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 5.6% saturation with 341 hits. Analysis detected 2,063 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,100 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (21,877 of 24,547 topics). This Detroit Tigers is better (less manipulative) than 89.10% of the peer group.
Detroit Tigers

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

11% percentile
025507510010.9% percentile
1.3% BS Score3 analyzed articles6.1K 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 0.9%0.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.3%2.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.7%3.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.2%1.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.1%0.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 2.0%2.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.4%0.4%

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 0.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.5%, sitewide 3.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos