Author summary
21%1 analyzed article/video758 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Christina van Waasbergen results contain 20 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Burden of Proof, and False Dilemma, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 5.6% saturation with 169 hits. Analysis detected 1,261 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,032 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 47% (5,078 of 9,485 authors). This Christina van Waasbergen is better (less manipulative) than 53.50% of the peer group.
Christina van Waasbergen
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Hannah Martin1%
0%Paul DeMark1%
0%Emma Sedlak1%
0%Michael Fox1%
0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
47%Christina van Waasbergen (selected)3%
100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 3,032
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

47% percentile
025507510046.5% percentile
2.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles3K 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 3.1%3.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 0.4%0.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 4.3%4.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.9%0.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 1.9%1.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 5.6%5.6%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 1.7%1.7%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Author 3.9%3.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%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 3.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 5.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 1.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 7.5%Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 4.0%Burden of Proof: Author 3.9%, sitewide 0.4%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 3.7%False Dilemma: Author 3.4%, sitewide 1.5%Recency Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.7%, sitewide 0.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.4%Straw Man: Author 1.4%, sitewide 0.9%Red Herring: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos