Topic summary
⁠50%3 analyzed articles/videos2,210 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Infidelity results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.1% saturation with 719 hits. Analysis detected 5,600 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,840 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠19% (19,339 of 23,637 topics). This Infidelity is better (less manipulative) than 81.80% of the peer group.
Infidelity
Topic details
Total words: 8,840
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

18% percentile
025507510018.2% percentile
1.5% BS Score3 analyzed articles8.8K 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 1.2%1.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.2%2.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 8.1%8.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.7%3.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.8%1.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 1.8%1.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.5%3.5%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 0.1%0.1%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.8%0.8%

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 1.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 8.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.3%, sitewide 3.3%Indoctrination: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos