Author summary
⁠97%5 analyzed articles/videos2,893 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Eddie Scarry results contain 48 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Negativity Bias, and Ad Hominem, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 40.1% saturation with 5,068 hits. Analysis detected 28,101 faulty-reasoning hits from 12,630 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠86% (1,267 of 8,739 authors). This Eddie Scarry is worse (more manipulative) than 85.50% of the peer group.
Eddie Scarry
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠86%Eddie Scarry (selected)5%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 12,630
Article count: 5
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

86% percentile
025507510085.5% percentile
4.6% BS Score5 analyzed articles12.6K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 40.1%40.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 5.9%5.9%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Author 22.1%22.1%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Author 17.9%17.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 1.1%1.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 17.1%17.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 0.3%0.3%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Author 7.1%7.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 0.2%0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Author 8.8%8.8%

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%Biased Writer Voice: Author 40.1%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Author 5.9%, sitewide 26.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 22.1%, sitewide 1.4%Negativity Bias: Author 21.9%, sitewide 19.2%Ad Hominem: Author 17.9%, sitewide 2.2%Hasty Generalization: Author 17.1%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Emotion: Author 11.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 1.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 5.2%, sitewide 9.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 8.8%, sitewide 3.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 6.7%, sitewide 7.5%Straw Man: Author 7.1%, sitewide 0.9%In-Group Bias: Author 5.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Author 5.3%, sitewide 5.2%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 4.8%, sitewide 2.7%Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Indoctrination: Author 3.9%, sitewide 0.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.9%, sitewide 3.3%Slippery Slope: Author 3.1%, sitewide 1.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos