Keyword summary
0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These LGBTQ St Louis results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Self-Serving Bias, and False Dilemma, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 7.8% saturation with 278 hits. Analysis detected 2,650 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,576 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 34,692 keywords). This LGBTQ St Louis is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
LGBTQ St Louis
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
0%Javian Hawkins1%
0%Atlanta Falcons1%
0%Anthony Romano1%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
0%LGBTQ St Louis (selected)0%
Keyword details
Total words: 3,576
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% 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 2.7%2.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 3.4%3.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 7.8%7.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 3.2%3.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 5.7%5.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 3.2%3.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 2.9%2.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 1.6%1.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 2.5%2.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 1.3%1.3%

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 2.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 7.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 5.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 5.5%, sitewide 3.7%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 4.0%False Dilemma: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 3.7%, sitewide 0.8%Recency Bias: Keyword 3.3%, sitewide 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Actor-Observer Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 0.6%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos