Keyword summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video509 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Marine Mammal Protection Act results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Negativity Bias, and Framing Effect, with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 14.5% saturation with 296 hits. Analysis detected 1,226 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,036 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠33% (25,357 of 37,536 keywords). This Marine Mammal Protection Act is better (less manipulative) than 67.60% of the peer group.
Marine Mammal Protection Act
Keyword ranking list
Keyword details
Total words: 2,036
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

32% percentile
025507510032.4% percentile
2.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2K 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 3.7%3.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 4.6%4.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 2.5%2.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Keyword 14.5%14.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 1.5%1.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 1.0%1.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 3.0%3.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.9%1.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Keyword 0.3%0.3%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Keyword 1.1%1.1%

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 3.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 4.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 15.9%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 14.5%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 4.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 6.9%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 3.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 0.0%Bandwagon: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 1.9%Actor-Observer Bias: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 0.6%Red Herring: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 0.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 0.8%Unattributed Quote: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.1%Indoctrination: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos