Keyword summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,267 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Pentagon Spending results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, In-Group Bias, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 20.9% saturation with 1,059 hits. Analysis detected 4,118 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,068 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠42% (21,927 of 37,536 keywords). This Pentagon Spending is better (less manipulative) than 58.40% of the peer group.
Pentagon Spending
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
⁠0%Lieutenant Governor1%
⁠0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
⁠0%Texas Supreme Court1%
⁠0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
⁠0%Running Back1%
⁠42%Pentagon Spending (selected)3%
⁠100%Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%Mike Lewis60%
⁠100%Joni Balter60%
⁠100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 5,068
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

42% percentile
025507510041.6% percentile
2.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.1K 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 6.0%6.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 8.6%8.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 2.3%2.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 1.9%1.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 0.6%0.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 0.7%0.7%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 2.5%2.5%

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 6.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 20.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 8.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 6.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 4.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 3.1%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos