Author summary
⁠52%1 analyzed article/video639 analyzed words
BS Summary: These B. ā€œToastieā€ Oaster results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, In-Group Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.5% saturation with 217 hits. Analysis detected 1,519 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,556 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠48% (4,525 of 8,708 authors). This B. ā€œToastieā€ Oaster is better (less manipulative) than 52.00% of the peer group.
B. ā€œToastieā€ Oaster
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠48%B. ā€œToastieā€ Oaster (selected)3%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 2,556
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

48% percentile
025507510048.0% percentile
2.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.6K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 8.0%8.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 4.5%4.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 8.5%8.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 1.6%1.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 1.6%1.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 0.9%0.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.8%1.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 0.9%0.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 0.9%0.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 2.4%2.4%

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 8.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 8.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 1.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 1.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 0.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 2.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.9%Middle Ground: Author 1.7%, sitewide 0.1%Hindsight Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.4%Actor-Observer Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.0%Straw Man: Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos