Keyword summary
0%1 analyzed article/video1,309 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hmc Stratcap results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 14.5% saturation with 759 hits. Analysis detected 5,392 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,236 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of 45% (20,961 of 37,536 keywords). This Hmc Stratcap is better (less manipulative) than 55.80% of the peer group.
Hmc Stratcap
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Lieutenant Governor1%
0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
45%Hmc Stratcap (selected)3%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 5,236
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

44% percentile
025507510044.2% percentile
2.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.2K 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 13.1%13.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 9.8%9.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 5.2%5.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 2.2%2.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.8%1.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 4.0%4.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 14.5%14.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 3.4%3.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 1.5%1.5%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Keyword 3.2%3.2%

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 13.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 14.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 9.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 5.2%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 6.9%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 4.6%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 3.3%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 3.7%Tu Quoque: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 3.1%Unattributed Quote: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 1.1%Loss Aversion: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 2.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 2.7%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.9%Bandwagon: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos