Author summary
13% 5 analyzed articles/videos 2,591 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Eleanor Shaw results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Optimism Bias , and Framing Effect , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 3.6% saturation with 415 hits . Analysis detected 4,188 faulty-reasoning hits from 11,672 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1% and a BS Rank of 5% (8,207 of 8,642 authors). This Eleanor Shaw is better (less manipulative) than 95.00% of the peer group. Eleanor Shaw
Author details
Total words: 11,672
Article count: 5
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
5% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 5.0% percentile 1.0% BS Score5 analyzed articles11.7K 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 2.3% 2.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 1.6% 1.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 3.6% 3.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.9% 2.9% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 0.6% 0.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.9% 1.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.2% 1.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 0.2% 0.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.9% 1.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.1% 2.1% 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 2.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 3.6%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.9%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 0.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.1%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst