Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Court Watching results contain 10 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 3.6% saturation with 128 hits. Analysis detected 387 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,514 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 21,924 topics). This Court Watching is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Court Watching
Topic details
Total words: 3,514
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.5K 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 2.0%2.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 3.6%3.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.3%1.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.1%1.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 0.4%0.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.3%0.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 0.9%0.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.5%0.5%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.5%0.5%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Topic 0.4%0.4%

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 2.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 3.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 4.6%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos