Author summary
83% 1 analyzed article/video 805 analyzed words
BS Summary: These James Carter results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Biased Writer Voice , and Negativity Bias , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 10.5% saturation with 338 hits . Analysis detected 2,877 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,220 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of 70% (2,921 of 9,471 authors). This James Carter is worse (more manipulative) than 69.20% of the peer group. James Carter
Author details
Total words: 3,220
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
69% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 69.2% percentile 3.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.2K 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 4.2% 4.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.9% 1.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 8.1% 8.1% Attempt to Sell a Product… Sitewide 0.5% Author 7.5% 7.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.1% 2.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.3% 0.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.0% 6.0% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.0% 1.0% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 8.5% 8.5% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 2.0% 2.0% 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 4.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 8.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.9%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.0%, sitewide 11.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 10.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 9.7%, sitewide 7.5% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 8.5%, sitewide 5.3% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 7.5%, sitewide 0.5% Halo Effect: Author 5.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 1.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.8%, sitewide 3.3% False Dilemma: Author 3.6%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Indoctrination: Author 2.4%, sitewide 0.0% Bandwagon: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7% Begging the Question: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst