Author summary
88%2 analyzed articles/videos1,545 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Danielle Venton results contain 37 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Halo Effect, and Biased Writer Voice, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 15.2% saturation with 700 hits. Analysis detected 5,834 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,613 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.4% and a BS Rank of 76% (2,290 of 9,471 authors). This Danielle Venton is worse (more manipulative) than 75.80% of the peer group.
Danielle Venton
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Hannah Martin1%
0%Paul DeMark1%
0%Emma Sedlak1%
0%Michael Fox1%
0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
76%Danielle Venton (selected)4%
100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 4,613
Article count: 2
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

76% percentile
025507510075.8% percentile
3.4% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.6K 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 12.6%12.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 5.4%5.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 3.7%3.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.4%2.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.9%0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Author 6.4%6.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 8.7%8.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 1.5%1.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 9.7%9.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 2.3%2.3%

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 12.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 5.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 15.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 3.7%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Author 9.7%, sitewide 6.7%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.4%, sitewide 9.1%Biased Writer Voice: Author 8.7%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Author 6.7%, sitewide 8.1%Optimism Bias: Author 7.7%, sitewide 6.0%Confirmation Bias: Author 6.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 6.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 6.4%, sitewide 0.5%Anecdotal: Author 2.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 4.6%Pessimism Bias: Author 4.0%, sitewide 1.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 2.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.1%False Dilemma: Author 3.1%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to Nature: Author 3.0%, sitewide 0.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Straw Man: Author 2.7%, sitewide 0.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos