Topic summary
⁠92%3 analyzed articles/videos5,357 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Los Angeles Food Scene results contain 48 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Anecdotal, and Optimism Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 9.1% saturation with 1,946 hits. Analysis detected 19,839 faulty-reasoning hits from 21,428 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠36% (15,263 of 23,519 topics). This Los Angeles Food Scene is better (less manipulative) than 64.90% of the peer group.
Los Angeles Food Scene
Topic details
Total words: 21,428
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

35% percentile
025507510035.1% percentile
1.9% BS Score3 analyzed articles21.4K 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 3.1%3.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.3%4.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 3.2%3.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 4.3%4.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 2.4%2.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 9.1%9.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Topic 1.1%1.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 4.7%4.7%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Topic 0.6%0.6%

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 3.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 4.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 9.1%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Topic 7.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 5.4%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 3.7%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 0.5%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Hindsight Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 1.4%Bandwagon: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos