Keyword summary
99% 1 analyzed article/video 329 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Senatorial Debate results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Representativeness Heuristic , Hasty Generalization , and Anecdotal , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 56.2% saturation with 739 hits . Analysis detected 3,297 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,316 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 9.6% and a BS Rank of 97% (2,192 of 59,653 keywords). This Senatorial Debate is worse (more manipulative) than 96.30% of the peer group. Senatorial Debate
Keyword details
Total words: 1,316
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
96% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 96.3% percentile 9.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.3K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 56.2% 56.2% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Keyword 3.5% 3.5% Representativeness Heuris… Sitewide 1.9% Keyword 21.9% 21.9% Horn Effect Sitewide 1.0% Keyword 15.7% 15.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Keyword 15.3% 15.3% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Keyword 13.4% 13.4% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 16.3% 16.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 18.9% 18.9% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Keyword 10.8% 10.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 2.8% 2.8% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 56.2%, sitewide 5.3% Framing Effect: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 26.9% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 21.9%, sitewide 1.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 13.5%, sitewide 19.2% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 18.9%, sitewide 8.1% Anecdotal: Keyword 16.3%, sitewide 5.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 8.8%, sitewide 15.9% Horn Effect: Keyword 15.7%, sitewide 1.0% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 15.3%, sitewide 3.1% Ad Hominem: Keyword 13.4%, sitewide 2.2% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 11.1% Unattributed Quote: Keyword 10.8%, sitewide 1.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 5.6%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 6.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 6.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 4.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 6.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 6.0%, sitewide 0.8% False Dilemma: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 2.7% Straw Man: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 0.9% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Keyword 3.3%, sitewide 1.4% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 2.9%, sitewide 3.3% No True Scotsman: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 0.1% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst