Topic summary
⁠39%3 analyzed articles/videos3,608 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Local Dining results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Overconfidence Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 13% saturation with 1,452 hits. Analysis detected 9,176 faulty-reasoning hits from 11,177 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠46% (12,345 of 22,500 topics). This Local Dining is better (less manipulative) than 54.90% of the peer group.
Local Dining
Topic details
Total words: 11,177
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

45% percentile
025507510045.1% percentile
2.3% BS Score3 analyzed articles11.2K 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 2.9%2.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.7%1.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 13.0%13.0%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 10.3%10.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 10.3%10.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 5.8%5.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.3%1.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 4.1%4.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 3.1%3.1%

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 2.9%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Topic 13.0%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Topic 5.8%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 10.3%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 6.0%Bandwagon: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Appeal to Nature: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 0.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 0.5%Recency Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos