Author summary
100% 1 analyzed article/video 72 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jon Gingerich results contain 10 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias , Biased Writer Voice , and Self-Serving Bias , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 51.4% saturation with 148 hits . Analysis detected 427 faulty-reasoning hits from 288 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 14.8% and a BS Rank of 99% (167 of 8,558 authors). This Jon Gingerich is worse (more manipulative) than 98.10% of the peer group. Jon Gingerich
Author details
Total words: 288
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
98% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 98.1% percentile 14.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles288 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 51.4% 51.4% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 4.9% 4.9% Pessimism Bias Sitewide 1.9% Author 19.1% 19.1% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 17.7% 17.7% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 13.2% 13.2% Actor-Observer Bias Sitewide 0.6% Author 8.3% 8.3% Hindsight Bias Sitewide 1.4% Author 5.6% 5.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 12.2% 12.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 11.1% 11.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 4.9% 4.9% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Negativity Bias: Author 51.4%, sitewide 19.2% Framing Effect: Author 4.9%, sitewide 26.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 19.1%, sitewide 1.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 17.7%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 12.2%, sitewide 15.9% Self-Serving Bias: Author 13.2%, sitewide 3.7% Hasty Generalization: Author 11.1%, sitewide 8.1% Actor-Observer Bias: Author 8.3%, sitewide 0.6% Hindsight Bias: Author 5.6%, sitewide 1.4% Anecdotal: Author 4.9%, sitewide 5.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst