Topic summary
⁠58%1 analyzed article/video239 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Spokane Complex Fires results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Confirmation Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 18.9% saturation with 181 hits. Analysis detected 588 faulty-reasoning hits from 956 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠87% (3,333 of 24,371 topics). This Spokane Complex Fires is worse (more manipulative) than 86.30% of the peer group.
Spokane Complex Fires
Topic details
Total words: 956
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

86% percentile
025507510086.3% percentile
5.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles956 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.9%0.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 18.9%18.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 10.0%10.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 2.0%2.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 2.2%2.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 3.7%3.7%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 4.0%4.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 6.4%6.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Topic 2.3%2.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 8.9%8.9%

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%Availability Heuristic: Topic 18.9%, sitewide 9.1%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 11.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 10.0%, sitewide 6.0%Hasty Generalization: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 6.4%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 5.2%Recency Bias: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3%Pessimism Bias: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 1.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos