Keyword summary
67%2 analyzed articles/videos794 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ice Agents results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Appeal to Emotion, and Hasty Generalization, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 12.6% saturation with 405 hits. Analysis detected 3,030 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,211 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of 52% (17,066 of 35,444 keywords). This Ice Agents is worse (more manipulative) than 51.90% of the peer group.
Ice Agents
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
0%Javian Hawkins1%
0%Atlanta Falcons1%
0%Anthony Romano1%
52%Ice Agents (selected)3%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 3,211
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

52% percentile
025507510051.9% percentile
2.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.2K 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 12.6%12.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 8.7%8.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 0.9%0.9%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Keyword 11.2%11.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 9.9%9.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 1.3%1.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 2.2%2.2%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Keyword 0.7%0.7%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Keyword 0.4%0.4%

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 12.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 8.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 9.9%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Keyword 11.2%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 9.1%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 4.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 4.3%, sitewide 2.0%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 3.1%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.4%Bandwagon: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos