Keyword summary
71% 1 analyzed article/video 864 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Austin City Limits results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect , Hasty Generalization , and Negativity Bias , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 32.1% saturation with 1,109 hits . Analysis detected 3,344 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,456 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.5% and a BS Rank of 73% (15,837 of 57,501 keywords). This Austin City Limits is worse (more manipulative) than 72.50% of the peer group. Austin City Limits
Keyword details
Total words: 3,456
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
73% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 72.5% percentile 3.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.5K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 32.1% 32.1% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 4.1% 4.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 5.0% 5.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 1.7% 1.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 1.6% 1.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 2.1% 2.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 3.7% 3.7% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 1.5% 1.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Keyword 3.6% 3.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 3.2% 3.2% 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% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 32.1%, sitewide 5.3% Framing Effect: Keyword 4.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 5.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Halo Effect: Keyword 8.7%, sitewide 6.7% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 7.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 3.7%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 5.2% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 3.7% Indoctrination: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 0.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.5% Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 1.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 0.8% Appeal to Nature: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 0.2% Begging the Question: Keyword 0.2%, sitewide 1.7% Burden of Proof: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 0.4% Primacy Effect: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 0.9% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst