Topic summary
82% 6 analyzed articles/videos 3,851 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Us Congressional Elections results contain 47 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Appeal to Emotion , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.8% saturation with 2,911 hits . Analysis detected 18,038 faulty-reasoning hits from 18,451 analyzed words across 6 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 41% (14,237 of 23,917 topics). This Us Congressional Elections is better (less manipulative) than 59.50% of the peer group. Us Congressional Elections
Topic details
Total words: 18,451
Article count: 6
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
41% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 40.5% percentile 2.1% BS Score6 analyzed articles18.5K 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 5.7% 5.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 6.4% 6.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 3.4% 3.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 2.2% 2.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 2.6% 2.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 1.3% 1.3% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Topic 0.6% 0.6% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Topic 9.0% 9.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 3.2% 3.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 15.8% 15.8% 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 5.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 15.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 9.1% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 9.0%, sitewide 5.3% Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 5.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 4.6%, sitewide 2.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.1%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 1.6%, sitewide 2.7% Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 0.0% Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Topic 1.7%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst