Author summary
92% 4 analyzed articles/videos 3,585 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emily Goodin results contain 45 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Overconfidence Bias , and Biased Writer Voice , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 13% saturation with 1,865 hits . Analysis detected 17,534 faulty-reasoning hits from 14,340 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of 64% (3,412 of 9,397 authors). This Emily Goodin is worse (more manipulative) than 63.70% of the peer group. Emily Goodin
Author details
Total words: 14,340
Article count: 4
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
64% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 63.7% percentile 2.7% BS Score4 analyzed articles14.3K 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 8.6% 8.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.8% 3.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.6% 2.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 12.8% 12.8% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.8% 0.8% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 10.4% 10.4% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.5% 0.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.0% 3.0% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 9.8% 9.8% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 9.2% 9.2% 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 8.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 12.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 13.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.8%, sitewide 11.1% Overconfidence Bias: Author 10.4%, sitewide 4.6% Biased Writer Voice: Author 9.8%, sitewide 5.3% Optimism Bias: Author 9.2%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 7.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.8%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Author 0.5%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 3.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 1.4% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.9%, sitewide 3.3% Ad Hominem: Author 3.1%, sitewide 2.2% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.5% Indoctrination: Author 2.5%, sitewide 0.0% Loss Aversion: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.5% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst