Topic summary
⁠16%1 analyzed article/video846 analyzed words
BS Summary: These University Presidents results contain 13 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Halo Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 7.8% saturation with 265 hits. Analysis detected 793 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,384 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠31% (16,027 of 22,921 topics). This University Presidents is better (less manipulative) than 69.90% of the peer group.
University Presidents
Topic details
Total words: 3,384
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

30% percentile
025507510030.1% percentile
1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.4K 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 1.2%1.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 1.6%1.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.4%1.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.5%0.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.9%0.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Topic 0.5%0.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 3.3%3.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 7.8%7.8%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Topic 0.9%0.9%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Topic 1.2%1.2%

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 1.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 9.1%Optimism Bias: Topic 7.8%, sitewide 6.0%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 3.7%, sitewide 3.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Sunk Cost Effect: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 0.3%No True Scotsman: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 0.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos