Keyword summary
0% 4 analyzed articles/videos 3,355 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Pittsburgh Steelers results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias , Halo Effect , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.8% saturation with 1,809 hits . Analysis detected 13,183 faulty-reasoning hits from 11,448 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of 45% (20,655 of 37,536 keywords). This Pittsburgh Steelers is better (less manipulative) than 55.00% of the peer group. Pittsburgh Steelers
Keyword details
Total words: 11,448
Article count: 4
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
45% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 45.0% percentile 2.7% BS Score4 analyzed articles11.4K 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% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 9.8% 9.8% Recency Bias Sitewide 2.7% Keyword 14.1% 14.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 0.5% 0.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 5.9% 5.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 1.6% 1.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 2.8% 2.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 4.1% 4.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 10.9% 10.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 15.8% 15.8% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 2.2% 2.2% 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 9.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 15.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 5.9%, sitewide 15.9% Recency Bias: Keyword 14.1%, sitewide 2.7% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 11.1% Halo Effect: Keyword 10.9%, sitewide 6.7% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 4.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 6.9% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 6.8%, sitewide 5.3% Optimism Bias: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 5.2% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 5.1%, sitewide 2.7% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst