Keyword summary
62% 2 analyzed articles/videos 890 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chicago Bears results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Recency Bias , and Ambiguity (Equivocation) , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 11.3% saturation with 341 hits . Analysis detected 2,337 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,026 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.5% and a BS Rank of 41% (22,447 of 37,536 keywords). This Chicago Bears is better (less manipulative) than 59.80% of the peer group. Chicago Bears
Keyword details
Total words: 3,026
Article count: 2
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
40% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 40.2% percentile 2.5% BS Score2 analyzed articles3K 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% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 2.9% 2.9% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 11.3% 11.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 0.4% 0.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 0.4% 0.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 4.0% 4.0% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 10.7% 10.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 2.8% 2.8% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Keyword 5.5% 5.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 4.5% 4.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 0.8% 0.8% 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 11.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 10.7%, sitewide 5.3% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 6.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 6.5%, sitewide 2.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 6.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 5.5%, sitewide 0.8% Anecdotal: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Bandwagon: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 2.2% Loss Aversion: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.5% Status Quo Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.2% Quote-first Misdirection: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 0.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst