Keyword summary
0% 5 analyzed articles/videos 4,441 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Snap (supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) results contain 45 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Framing Effect , and Post Hoc (False Cause) , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 6.4% saturation with 1,368 hits . Analysis detected 12,090 faulty-reasoning hits from 21,380 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.3% and a BS Rank of 4% (34,497 of 35,675 keywords). This Snap (supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) is better (less manipulative) than 96.70% of the peer group. Snap (supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program)
Keyword details
Total words: 21,380
Article count: 5
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
3% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 3.3% percentile 1.3% BS Score5 analyzed articles21.4K 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 4.8% 4.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 5.8% 5.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 6.4% 6.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 2.6% 2.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 2.1% 2.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 0.0% 0.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Keyword 0.4% 0.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 2.2% 2.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 3.4% 3.4% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 1.3% 1.3% 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 4.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 5.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 6.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 0.0%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 3.3% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 3.7% Pessimism Bias: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 1.9% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Slippery Slope: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 1.7% Loss Aversion: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst