Keyword summary
60%1 analyzed article/video791 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Senate Term results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 17.5% saturation with 553 hits. Analysis detected 2,875 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,164 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.8% and a BS Rank of 68% (11,683 of 35,715 keywords). This Senate Term is worse (more manipulative) than 67.30% of the peer group.
Senate Term
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
0%Javian Hawkins1%
0%Atlanta Falcons1%
0%Anthony Romano1%
68%Senate Term (selected)4%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 3,164
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

67% percentile
025507510067.3% percentile
3.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.2K 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 8.1%8.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 3.2%3.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 0.3%0.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 14.2%14.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 3.0%3.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 0.2%0.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 1.9%1.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 1.9%1.9%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Keyword 5.5%5.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 3.9%3.9%

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 8.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 17.5%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 14.2%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 10.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 3.9%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.2%, sitewide 6.0%Bandwagon: Keyword 5.5%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 5.2%Recency Bias: Keyword 4.4%, sitewide 2.7%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 3.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 1.7%Circular Reasoning: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 0.1%Hindsight Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 1.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 1.4%Unattributed Quote: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos