Keyword summary
83% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,099 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Urban Forestry results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias , Framing Effect , and Post Hoc (False Cause) , with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 10.3% saturation with 451 hits . Analysis detected 3,790 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,396 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.4% and a BS Rank of 51% (29,552 of 59,653 keywords). This Urban Forestry is worse (more manipulative) than 50.50% of the peer group. Urban Forestry
Keyword details
Total words: 4,396
Article count: 2
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
51% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 50.5% percentile 2.4% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.4K 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 6.4% 6.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 1.3% 1.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 4.6% 4.6% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Keyword 5.6% 5.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 1.2% 1.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 4.0% 4.0% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Keyword 1.2% 1.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 3.6% 3.6% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Keyword 0.4% 0.4% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Keyword 2.0% 2.0% 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 6.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 4.6%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 10.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 4.0%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 5.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Keyword 7.4%, sitewide 6.0% Halo Effect: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 6.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 5.7%, sitewide 3.3% Indoctrination: Keyword 5.6%, sitewide 0.0% Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.0%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 3.9%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 3.7% False Dilemma: Keyword 3.3%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 0.8% Bandwagon: Keyword 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst