Topic summary
69% 17 analyzed articles/videos 10,677 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Political Appointments results contain 53 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 13.4% saturation with 5,536 hits . Analysis detected 36,694 faulty-reasoning hits from 41,258 analyzed words across 17 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.7% and a BS Rank of 25% (16,843 of 22,421 topics). This Political Appointments is better (less manipulative) than 75.10% of the peer group. Political Appointments
Topic details
Total words: 41,258
Article count: 17
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
25% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 24.9% percentile 1.7% BS Score17 analyzed articles41.3K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 6.9% 6.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 6.4% 6.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 3.0% 3.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 1.9% 1.9% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Topic 11.7% 11.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 13.4% 13.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 1.4% 1.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 1.3% 1.3% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 0.9% 0.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 3.3% 3.3% 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 6.9%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 13.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.4%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 11.7%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 4.8%, sitewide 2.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 2.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst