Keyword summary
82% 2 analyzed articles/videos 742 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Cincinnati Bengals results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Overconfidence Bias , and Optimism Bias , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 18.4% saturation with 498 hits . Analysis detected 3,205 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,703 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.7% and a BS Rank of 66% (11,912 of 35,080 keywords). This Cincinnati Bengals is worse (more manipulative) than 66.00% of the peer group. Cincinnati Bengals
Keyword details
Total words: 2,703
Article count: 2
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
66% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 66.0% percentile 3.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles2.7K 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% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 2.1% 2.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 4.2% 4.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 18.4% 18.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 3.3% 3.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 3.8% 3.8% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Keyword 6.4% 6.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Keyword 1.7% 1.7% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Keyword 5.3% 5.3% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Keyword 8.5% 8.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 5.4% 5.4% 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 2.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 19.2% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 18.4%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 3.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 3.8%, sitewide 11.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 11.0%, sitewide 8.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 5.4%, sitewide 9.1% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 8.5%, sitewide 4.6% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 6.6%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Keyword 7.5%, sitewide 6.0% In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 6.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 6.4%, sitewide 0.8% Unattributed Quote: Keyword 5.3%, sitewide 1.1% Anecdotal: Keyword 4.1%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 4.0% Recency Bias: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 2.7% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Hindsight Bias: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 1.4% Status Quo Bias: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 2.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Indoctrination: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 0.0% Bandwagon: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst