Keyword summary
24% 1 analyzed article/video 1,022 analyzed words
BS Summary: These University Of Chicago Medicine results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Halo Effect , and Negativity Bias , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 11.1% saturation with 453 hits . Analysis detected 1,925 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,088 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of 35% (33,910 of 51,799 keywords). This University Of Chicago Medicine is better (less manipulative) than 65.50% of the peer group. University Of Chicago Medicine
Keyword details
Total words: 4,088
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed keywords
35% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 34.5% percentile 2.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.1K 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 1.3% 1.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Keyword 2.5% 2.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Keyword 1.2% 1.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Keyword 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Keyword 4.7% 4.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Keyword 2.2% 2.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Keyword 1.1% 1.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Keyword 2.4% 2.4% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Keyword 11.1% 11.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Keyword 2.7% 2.7% 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 1.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Keyword 2.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Keyword 4.7%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Keyword 11.1%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Keyword 2.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.5%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 3.3% Recency Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.5% Indoctrination: Keyword 2.4%, sitewide 0.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% Sunk Cost Effect: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 0.3% False Dilemma: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.5% Actor-Observer Bias: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 0.6% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 0.5% Burden of Proof: Keyword 0.9%, sitewide 0.4% Appeal to Nature: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 0.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Keyword rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst