Keyword summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 2,450 analyzed words
BS Summary: These U S Chinese Relations results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Confirmation Bias , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.1% saturation with 989 hits . Analysis detected 7,364 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,800 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of 24% (28,668 of 37,536 keywords). This U S Chinese Relations is better (less manipulative) than 76.40% of the peer group. U S Chinese Relations
Keyword details
Total words: 9,800
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
24% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 23.6% percentile 2.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles9.8K 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 3.0% 3.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 2.2% 2.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 10.1% 10.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Keyword 0.2% 0.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 3.6% 3.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 6.4% 6.4% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 1.7% 1.7% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 3.0% 3.0% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Keyword 0.2% 0.2% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Keyword 1.1% 1.1% 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 3.0%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 10.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 6.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 5.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 5.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 0.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 3.3% Indoctrination: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 0.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 0.8% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Keyword 2.6%, sitewide 1.5% Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.9%, 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