Author summary
58% 6 analyzed articles/videos 3,353 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ethan Stark-Miller results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Optimism Bias , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10% saturation with 1,337 hits . Analysis detected 10,154 faulty-reasoning hits from 13,412 analyzed words across 6 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 35% (6,151 of 9,435 authors). This Ethan Stark-Miller is better (less manipulative) than 65.20% of the peer group. Ethan Stark-Miller
Author details
Total words: 13,412
Article count: 6
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
35% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 34.8% percentile 1.8% BS Score6 analyzed articles13.4K 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 7.6% 7.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.0% 10.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.2% 8.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.6% 1.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.7% 0.7% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.2% 1.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.0% 3.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.8% 0.8% 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% Framing Effect: Author 7.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 10.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 1.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 5.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.9%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.8%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.4%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.1% Indoctrination: Author 2.9%, sitewide 0.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.2%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst