Keyword summary
52%1 analyzed article/video901 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tobacco Retailers results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.4% saturation with 147 hits. Analysis detected 1,792 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,703 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of 35% (24,657 of 37,536 keywords). This Tobacco Retailers is better (less manipulative) than 65.70% of the peer group.
Tobacco Retailers
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Lieutenant Governor1%
0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
35%Tobacco Retailers (selected)3%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 2,703
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

34% percentile
025507510034.3% percentile
2.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.7K 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 2.0%2.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 5.4%5.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 4.3%4.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 2.8%2.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 4.4%4.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 2.9%2.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 3.4%3.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 2.9%2.9%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%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%Framing Effect: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 5.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 4.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 7.5%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 4.0%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 4.6%Bandwagon: Keyword 4.2%, sitewide 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 3.3%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 2.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 1.5%Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.5%Appeal to Nature: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.0%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 1.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 0.5%Slippery Slope: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos