Author summary
77% 4 analyzed articles/videos 2,240 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Burgess Everett results contain 44 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Framing Effect , and Confirmation Bias , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 8.2% saturation with 732 hits . Analysis detected 7,514 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,960 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of 39% (5,478 of 8,953 authors). This Burgess Everett is better (less manipulative) than 61.20% of the peer group. Burgess Everett
Author details
Total words: 8,960
Article count: 4
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
39% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 38.8% percentile 1.9% BS Score4 analyzed articles9K 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 6.8% 6.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.4% 4.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.2% 8.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.6% 1.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.7% 4.7% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.4% 1.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.5% 2.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.9% 3.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.8% 2.8% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.5% 1.5% 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 6.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.7%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 4.9%, sitewide 7.5% Biased Writer Voice: Author 7.3%, sitewide 5.3% In-Group Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 1.5%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.8%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.0% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst