Topic summary
⁠52%1 analyzed article/video1,032 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Fact Checking Political Claims results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Framing Effect, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 6% saturation with 187 hits. Analysis detected 1,568 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,096 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠32% (16,567 of 24,148 topics). This Fact Checking Political Claims is better (less manipulative) than 68.60% of the peer group.
Fact Checking Political Claims
Topic details
Total words: 3,096
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

31% percentile
025507510031.4% percentile
1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.1K 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 3.3%3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.0%2.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 6.0%6.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.0%1.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.7%0.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.7%1.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 1.4%1.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.9%0.9%

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 3.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.4%, sitewide 3.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.8%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 0.0%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 1.9%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 1.9%Unattributed Quote: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 1.1%False Dilemma: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos