Topic summary
⁠17%1 analyzed article/video363 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Los Padres National Forest results contain 17 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Halo Effect, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 12.1% saturation with 175 hits. Analysis detected 684 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,452 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (10,075 of 23,993 topics). This Los Padres National Forest is worse (more manipulative) than 58.00% of the peer group.
Los Padres National Forest
Topic details
Total words: 1,452
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

58% percentile
025507510058.0% percentile
2.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.5K 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 0.3%0.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 2.9%2.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 7.4%7.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.9%2.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 1.2%1.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.0%3.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 1.4%1.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 1.6%1.6%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 2.9%2.9%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Topic 0.5%0.5%

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 0.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 7.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 12.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 5.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 4.6%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Burden of Proof: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 0.0%Indoctrination: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 0.5%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos