Topic summary
â 0% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,344 analyzed words
BS Summary: These White House Correspondentsâ Dinner results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Biased Writer Voice , and Availability Heuristic , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.4% saturation with 400 hits . Analysis detected 4,534 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,376 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.4% and a BS Rank of â 49% (11,603 of 22,481 topics). This White House Correspondentsâ Dinner is better (less manipulative) than 51.60% of the peer group. White House Correspondentsâ Dinner
Topic details
Total words: 5,376
Article count: 2
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
48% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 48.4% percentile 2.4% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.4K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0â50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 1.2% 1.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 7.4% 7.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 1.0% 1.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 6.4% 6.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.1% 0.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Topic 0.5% 0.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 3.4% 3.4% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Topic 0.5% 0.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 6.7% 6.7% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Topic 2.0% 2.0% 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 1.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 7.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 6.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 6.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 7.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 7.5% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 7.0%, sitewide 5.3% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Topic 3.8%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 2.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 3.1% Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 1.1% Recency Bias: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 2.7% Slippery Slope: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.7% Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.2%, sitewide 0.8% Ad Hominem: Topic 2.1%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst