Author summary
44% 1 analyzed article/video 1,061 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ashlee Valentine results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Indoctrination , and Ambiguity (Equivocation) , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 7.2% saturation with 307 hits . Analysis detected 2,217 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,244 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 37% (6,009 of 9,486 authors). This Ashlee Valentine is better (less manipulative) than 63.30% of the peer group. Ashlee Valentine
Author details
Total words: 4,244
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
37% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 36.7% percentile 1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.2K 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 0.6% 0.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 0.7% 0.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.2% 1.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.6% 2.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.1% 1.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.5% 0.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 5.8% 5.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.0% 6.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.5% 3.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 5.2% 5.2% 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 0.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Author 7.2%, sitewide 6.0% In-Group Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.4%, sitewide 6.7% Indoctrination: Author 5.8%, sitewide 0.0% Anecdotal: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 5.2%, sitewide 0.8% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Unattributed Quote: Author 2.3%, sitewide 1.1% Bandwagon: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.9% False Dilemma: Author 1.4%, sitewide 1.5% Straw Man: Author 0.5%, sitewide 0.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst