Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Childhood Nutrition results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Loss Aversion, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 4.7% saturation with 120 hits. Analysis detected 390 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,530 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 24,545 topics). This Childhood Nutrition is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Childhood Nutrition
Topic details
Total words: 2,530
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 1.1%1.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 0.4%0.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 1.4%1.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 4.2%4.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 4.7%4.7%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Topic 1.4%1.4%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%5%5%10%10%15%15%20%20%25%25%Negativity Bias: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 8.1%Halo Effect: Topic 4.2%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 6.0%Loss Aversion: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 2.5%Negativity BiasSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos