Keyword summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 601 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Valentino Amil results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Negativity Bias , with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 18.6% saturation with 448 hits . Analysis detected 2,789 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,404 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.3% and a BS Rank of 74% (9,769 of 37,536 keywords). This Valentino Amil is worse (more manipulative) than 74.00% of the peer group. Valentino Amil
Keyword details
Total words: 2,404
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
74% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 74.0% percentile 4.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.4K 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 11.3% 11.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 18.6% 18.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 7.6% 7.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 4.3% 4.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 1.9% 1.9% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 3.4% 3.4% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Keyword 0.9% 0.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 4.7% 4.7% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Keyword 4.4% 4.4% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Keyword 5.9% 5.9% 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 11.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 7.6%, sitewide 19.2% Halo Effect: Keyword 18.6%, sitewide 6.7% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 17.9%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 4.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 3.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 4.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 7.0%, sitewide 6.9% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 6.9%, sitewide 5.3% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 5.9%, sitewide 3.7% Anecdotal: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Ad Hominem: Keyword 4.4%, sitewide 2.2% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 3.1% Begging the Question: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 1.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 1.9% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 1.4% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 0.8% Indoctrination: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 0.0% Straw Man: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 0.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst