Topic summary
⁠78%1 analyzed article/video802 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Online Conduct results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Burden of Proof, and Self-Serving Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 17.1% saturation with 550 hits. Analysis detected 2,467 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,208 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (11,204 of 22,529 topics). This Online Conduct is worse (more manipulative) than 50.30% of the peer group.
Online Conduct
Topic details
Total words: 3,208
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

50% percentile
025507510050.3% percentile
2.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.2K 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 3.8%3.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 2.1%2.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.3%3.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 1.2%1.2%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Topic 5.2%5.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 3.0%3.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 6.7%6.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 3.8%3.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.4%1.4%

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 3.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 17.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 6.9%Ad Hominem: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 5.2%Burden of Proof: Topic 5.2%, sitewide 0.4%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 5.0%, sitewide 3.7%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.3%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos