Keyword summary
50%1 analyzed article/video647 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ohio Senate Race results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Framing Effect, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 19.1% saturation with 495 hits. Analysis detected 2,854 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,588 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.2% and a BS Rank of 59% (15,596 of 37,536 keywords). This Ohio Senate Race is worse (more manipulative) than 58.50% of the peer group.
Ohio Senate Race
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Lieutenant Governor1%
0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
59%Ohio Senate Race (selected)4%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 2,588
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

59% percentile
025507510058.5% percentile
3.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.6K 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 8.4%8.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 8.2%8.2%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Keyword 11.5%11.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 0.5%0.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 4.2%4.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 2.5%2.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 0.6%0.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 2.0%2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Keyword 4.2%4.2%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Keyword 1.2%1.2%

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 8.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 8.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 19.1%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Keyword 11.5%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 5.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 6.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 5.5%, sitewide 3.3%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 5.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 1.4%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 4.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 0.8%Unattributed Quote: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 1.1%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 3.7%, sitewide 3.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 3.3%, sitewide 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos