Keyword summary
97% 2 analyzed articles/videos 196 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sarah Beckstrom results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Negativity Bias , and Halo Effect , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 26.9% saturation with 486 hits . Analysis detected 2,967 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,806 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 5.9% and a BS Rank of 86% (5,372 of 37,536 keywords). This Sarah Beckstrom is worse (more manipulative) than 85.70% of the peer group. Sarah Beckstrom
Keyword details
Total words: 1,806
Article count: 2
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
86% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 85.7% percentile 5.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles1.8K 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% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 26.9% 26.9% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 1.8% 1.8% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 21.3% 21.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 6.3% 6.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 11.5% 11.5% Horn Effect Sitewide 1.0% Keyword 5.5% 5.5% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 1.7% 1.7% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Keyword 7.4% 7.4% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 2.0% 2.0% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Keyword 5.5% 5.5% 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 21.3%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 26.9%, sitewide 15.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 17.3%, sitewide 19.2% Halo Effect: Keyword 11.5%, sitewide 6.7% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 6.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 9.6%, sitewide 9.1% In-Group Bias: Keyword 9.6%, sitewide 6.9% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 6.1%, sitewide 7.5% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 7.4%, sitewide 3.3% Optimism Bias: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 6.0% Ad Hominem: Keyword 5.5%, sitewide 2.2% Horn Effect: Keyword 5.5%, sitewide 1.0% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 5.2% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 3.7% Begging the Question: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 1.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 2.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 3.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 0.8% Hindsight Bias: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 1.4% Bandwagon: Keyword 2.3%, sitewide 2.2% Genetic Fallacy: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 1.4% Red Herring: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 0.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst