Keyword summary
29% 1 analyzed article/video 1,107 analyzed words
BS Summary: These South Carolina Senate Race results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Negativity Bias , and Hasty Generalization , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 4.4% saturation with 194 hits . Analysis detected 1,623 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,428 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 20% (46,128 of 57,353 keywords). This South Carolina Senate Race is better (less manipulative) than 80.40% of the peer group. South Carolina Senate Race
Keyword details
Total words: 4,428
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
20% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 19.6% percentile 1.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.4K 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 4.2% 4.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 3.4% 3.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 4.4% 4.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 0.7% 0.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 0.8% 0.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 1.5% 1.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 0.8% 0.8% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 0.4% 0.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 3.0% 3.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Keyword 1.8% 1.8% 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 4.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Slippery Slope: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 1.7% Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.9% Indoctrination: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 0.0% Burden of Proof: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 0.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst