Keyword summary
⁠52%1 analyzed article/video1,146 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Charcoal results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Emotion, and Overconfidence Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 10.6% saturation with 363 hits. Analysis detected 2,982 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,438 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (19,441 of 37,536 keywords). This Charcoal is better (less manipulative) than 51.80% of the peer group.
Charcoal
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
⁠0%Lieutenant Governor1%
⁠0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
⁠0%Texas Supreme Court1%
⁠0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
⁠0%Running Back1%
⁠49%Charcoal (selected)3%
⁠100%Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%Mike Lewis60%
⁠100%Joni Balter60%
⁠100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 3,438
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

48% percentile
025507510048.2% percentile
2.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.4K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

KeywordSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 0.4%0.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 6.7%6.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 3.8%3.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 0.2%0.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 10.6%10.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Keyword 4.5%4.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 3.1%3.1%Composition/DivisionSitewide 0.2%Keyword 3.0%3.0%

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%Negativity Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 6.7%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 3.8%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 10.6%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 9.8%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 5.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 6.7%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 6.3%, sitewide 4.6%Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.2%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 5.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 0.8%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 4.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Composition/Division: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.5%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.9%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Burden of Proof: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 0.4%Begging the Question: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 1.7%Negativity BiasSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos