Keyword summary
0%1 analyzed article/video2,418 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Civil Servants results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Emotion, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 11.8% saturation with 1,143 hits. Analysis detected 7,262 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,672 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 17% (31,173 of 37,536 keywords). This Civil Servants is better (less manipulative) than 83.00% of the peer group.
Civil Servants
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Lieutenant Governor1%
0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
17%Civil Servants (selected)2%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 9,672
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

17% percentile
025507510017.0% percentile
1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles9.7K 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 3.5%3.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 4.8%4.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 3.1%3.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 11.8%11.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 2.1%2.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.2%1.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 0.8%0.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 4.4%4.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 3.9%3.9%

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 3.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 11.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 4.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 3.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 6.4%, sitewide 5.3%Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 2.0%Recency Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Keyword 0.0%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 1.9%Ad Hominem: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos