Author summary
32%3 analyzed articles/videos2,070 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Dorany Pineda results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Optimism Bias, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.5% saturation with 618 hits. Analysis detected 3,272 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,280 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 25% (6,409 of 8,528 authors). This Dorany Pineda is better (less manipulative) than 75.10% of the peer group.
Dorany Pineda
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Hannah Martin1%
0%Paul DeMark1%
0%Emma Sedlak1%
0%Michael Fox1%
0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
25%Dorany Pineda (selected)2%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 8,280
Article count: 3
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

25% percentile
025507510024.9% percentile
1.6% BS Score3 analyzed articles8.3K 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 2.5%2.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.6%1.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 7.5%7.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 1.3%1.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.2%0.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.6%2.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 4.7%4.7%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Author 0.3%0.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 0.6%0.6%

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 2.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 7.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 4.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 1.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Author 3.1%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.3%Pessimism Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Unattributed Quote: Author 2.0%, sitewide 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.5%, sitewide 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 0.3%, sitewide 0.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos