Keyword summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video910 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Columbia Bottom Conservation Area results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Biased Writer Voice, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 8.6% saturation with 312 hits. Analysis detected 2,073 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,640 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠19% (30,532 of 37,536 keywords). This Columbia Bottom Conservation Area is better (less manipulative) than 81.30% of the peer group.
Columbia Bottom Conservation Area
Keyword ranking list
Keyword details
Total words: 3,640
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

19% percentile
025507510018.7% percentile
1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.6K 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 3.9%3.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 2.8%2.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 1.8%1.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 2.9%2.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 0.9%0.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 2.4%2.4%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 1.3%1.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 0.4%0.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Keyword 7.6%7.6%

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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Optimism Bias: Keyword 8.6%, sitewide 6.0%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 8.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 7.6%, sitewide 3.3%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 6.7%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to Nature: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 0.2%Recency Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 1.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.0%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 0.8%Slippery Slope: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos