Keyword summary
⁠0%3 analyzed articles/videos1,613 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Anwar Gargash results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 11.3% saturation with 1,005 hits. Analysis detected 5,547 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,916 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠17% (31,281 of 37,536 keywords). This Anwar Gargash is better (less manipulative) than 83.30% of the peer group.
Anwar Gargash
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
⁠0%Lieutenant Governor1%
⁠0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
⁠0%Texas Supreme Court1%
⁠0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
⁠0%Running Back1%
⁠17%Anwar Gargash (selected)2%
⁠100%Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%Mike Lewis60%
⁠100%Joni Balter60%
⁠100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 8,916
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

17% percentile
025507510016.7% percentile
1.8% BS Score3 analyzed articles8.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

KeywordSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Keyword 8.0%8.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 4.5%4.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 2.7%2.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 11.3%11.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 2.4%2.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 2.1%2.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.1%1.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 3.5%3.5%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 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: Keyword 8.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 11.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 3.7%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 3.1%Unattributed Quote: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos