Keyword summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos1,059 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tan Vinh results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Framing Effect, and Halo Effect, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 30.4% saturation with 967 hits. Analysis detected 6,014 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,177 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 6.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠88% (4,748 of 37,536 keywords). This Tan Vinh is worse (more manipulative) than 87.40% of the peer group.
Tan Vinh
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
⁠0%Lieutenant Governor1%
⁠0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
⁠0%Texas Supreme Court1%
⁠0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
⁠0%Running Back1%
⁠88%Tan Vinh (selected)7%
⁠100%Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%Mike Lewis60%
⁠100%Joni Balter60%
⁠100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 3,177
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

87% percentile
025507510087.4% percentile
6.3% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

KeywordSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 30.4%30.4%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 24.7%24.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 7.5%7.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 4.8%4.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 15.6%15.6%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Keyword 19.7%19.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 15.6%15.6%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Keyword 8.5%8.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 1.5%1.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 0.5%0.5%

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%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 30.4%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Keyword 19.7%, sitewide 26.9%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 24.7%, sitewide 8.1%Negativity Bias: Keyword 7.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 15.6%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 15.6%, sitewide 9.1%Anecdotal: Keyword 9.4%, sitewide 5.2%In-Group Bias: Keyword 8.6%, sitewide 6.9%Bandwagon: Keyword 8.5%, sitewide 2.2%Optimism Bias: Keyword 8.5%, sitewide 6.0%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 7.5%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 5.6%, sitewide 4.6%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 5.2%, sitewide 4.0%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 1.9%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 3.8%, sitewide 1.9%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 3.7%Loss Aversion: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 2.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos