Author summary
⁠61%5 analyzed articles/videos4,824 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hugh Cameron results contain 47 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Hasty Generalization, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 9% saturation with 1,733 hits. Analysis detected 15,088 faulty-reasoning hits from 19,296 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠30% (6,231 of 8,783 authors). This Hugh Cameron is better (less manipulative) than 70.90% of the peer group.
Hugh Cameron
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠30%Hugh Cameron (selected)2%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 19,296
Article count: 5
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

29% percentile
025507510029.1% percentile
1.7% BS Score5 analyzed articles19.3K 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 6.2%6.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 4.3%4.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 9.0%9.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 4.0%4.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.9%0.9%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 0.8%0.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 3.7%3.7%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 1.3%1.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 3.5%3.5%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 1.3%1.3%

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 6.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 9.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 4.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 3.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 5.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 0.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.1%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.5%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Author 2.7%, sitewide 1.5%Recency Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos