Keyword summary
75% 3 analyzed articles/videos 1,008 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Liz Truss results contain 46 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Ad Hominem , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 45.7% saturation with 4,119 hits . Analysis detected 16,145 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,020 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.9% and a BS Rank of 70% (11,572 of 37,536 keywords). This Liz Truss is worse (more manipulative) than 69.20% of the peer group. Liz Truss
Keyword details
Total words: 9,020
Article count: 3
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
69% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 69.2% percentile 3.9% BS Score3 analyzed articles9K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 45.7% 45.7% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 8.8% 8.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 31.5% 31.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 5.4% 5.4% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Keyword 10.6% 10.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 3.0% 3.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 0.6% 0.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 3.0% 3.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 12.7% 12.7% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 2.0% 2.0% 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% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 45.7%, sitewide 5.3% Negativity Bias: Keyword 31.5%, sitewide 19.2% Framing Effect: Keyword 8.8%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 5.4%, sitewide 15.9% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 12.7%, sitewide 8.1% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 11.1% Ad Hominem: Keyword 10.6%, sitewide 2.2% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 5.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Keyword 6.2%, sitewide 5.2% Optimism Bias: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 6.0% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 4.3%, sitewide 3.3% False Dilemma: Keyword 3.9%, sitewide 1.5% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 3.1% Unattributed Quote: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 1.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 2.7% Pessimism Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.9% Indoctrination: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 0.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 0.8% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst