Keyword summary
⁠13%4 analyzed articles/videos4,571 analyzed words
BS Summary: These U.s. Fish And Wildlife Service results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Indoctrination, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 3.2% saturation with 549 hits. Analysis detected 5,079 faulty-reasoning hits from 16,943 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠2% (56,728 of 57,524 keywords). This U.s. Fish And Wildlife Service is better (less manipulative) than 98.60% of the peer group.
U.s. Fish And Wildlife Service
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
⁠0%Property Transfers1%
⁠0%Madison Township1%
⁠0%Buc-Ee's Travel Center1%
⁠0%Buc Ees Travel Center1%
⁠0%Paul Demark1%
⁠2%U.s. Fish And Wildlife Service (selected)1%
⁠100%Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%Mike Lewis60%
⁠100%Joni Balter60%
⁠100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details
Total words: 16,943
Article count: 4
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

1% percentile
02550751001.4% percentile
0.8% BS Score4 analyzed articles16.9K 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 1.0%1.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 2.8%2.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 3.2%3.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 0.7%0.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 0.5%0.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 0.7%0.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 1.5%1.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 2.7%2.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Keyword 0.7%0.7%

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 1.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 3.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.1%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.5%Indoctrination: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 0.0%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos