Keyword summary
27%2 analyzed articles/videos1,835 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Joint Task Force results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10% saturation with 826 hits. Analysis detected 5,028 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,238 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.7% and a BS Rank of 14% (31,990 of 37,187 keywords). This Joint Task Force is better (less manipulative) than 86.00% of the peer group.
Joint Task Force
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
0%Javian Hawkins1%
0%Atlanta Falcons1%
14%Joint Task Force (selected)2%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 8,238
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

14% percentile
025507510014.0% percentile
1.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles8.2K 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 5.3%5.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 4.9%4.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 10.0%10.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 2.3%2.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 0.6%0.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 2.3%2.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 3.6%3.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 2.7%2.7%

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 5.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 10.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 3.3%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 3.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 1.9%Ad Hominem: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos