Keyword summary
99% 1 analyzed article/video 329 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Senatorial Debate results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Representativeness Heuristic , Hasty Generalization , and Anecdotal , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 63.8% saturation with 630 hits . Analysis detected 3,188 faulty-reasoning hits from 987 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 12.4% and a BS Rank of 97% (1,172 of 36,197 keywords). This Senatorial Debate is worse (more manipulative) than 96.80% of the peer group. Senatorial Debate
Keyword details
Total words: 987
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
97% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 96.8% percentile 12.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles987 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 63.8% 63.8% Representativeness Heuris… Sitewide 1.9% Keyword 29.2% 29.2% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 4.7% 4.7% Horn Effect Sitewide 1.0% Keyword 21.0% 21.0% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Keyword 20.5% 20.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 25.2% 25.2% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 21.7% 21.7% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Keyword 17.8% 17.8% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Keyword 14.4% 14.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 3.8% 3.8% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 63.8%, sitewide 5.3% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 29.2%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect: Keyword 4.7%, sitewide 26.9% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 25.2%, sitewide 8.1% Anecdotal: Keyword 21.7%, sitewide 5.2% Horn Effect: Keyword 21.0%, sitewide 1.0% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 20.5%, sitewide 3.1% Negativity Bias: Keyword 18.0%, sitewide 19.2% Ad Hominem: Keyword 17.8%, sitewide 2.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 11.8%, sitewide 15.9% Unattributed Quote: Keyword 14.4%, sitewide 1.1% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 3.8%, sitewide 11.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 9.2%, sitewide 7.5% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 7.5%, sitewide 9.1% In-Group Bias: Keyword 8.6%, sitewide 6.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 8.0%, sitewide 0.8% Halo Effect: Keyword 6.5%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 6.0% False Dilemma: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 2.7% Straw Man: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 0.9% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 1.4% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 3.9%, sitewide 3.3% No True Scotsman: Keyword 3.8%, sitewide 0.1% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst