Author summary
52% 2 analyzed articles/videos 870 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amber Lee results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Biased Writer Voice , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 8.2% saturation with 284 hits . Analysis detected 2,285 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,480 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.5% and a BS Rank of 59% (3,740 of 8,965 authors). This Amber Lee is worse (more manipulative) than 58.30% of the peer group. Amber Lee
Author details
Total words: 3,480
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
58% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 58.3% percentile 2.5% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.5K 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% Author 6.7% 6.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.6% 4.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.6% 6.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 0.2% 0.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.3% 1.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 0.5% 0.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.8% 1.8% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.2% 1.2% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 0.5% 0.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 4.3% 4.3% 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: Author 6.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.6%, sitewide 15.9% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.3%, sitewide 9.1% Optimism Bias: Author 8.2%, sitewide 6.0% Hasty Generalization: Author 0.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 4.8%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 4.3%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 6.5%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.8%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 3.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 1.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 2.7%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.7%, sitewide 0.8% Begging the Question: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.7% Unattributed Quote: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.1% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst