Author summary
83% 14 analyzed articles/videos 8,785 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Julian Roberts-Grmela results contain 52 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Halo Effect , and Biased Writer Voice , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 9.5% saturation with 3,661 hits . Analysis detected 28,035 faulty-reasoning hits from 38,538 analyzed words across 14 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of 19% (7,244 of 8,907 authors). This Julian Roberts-Grmela is better (less manipulative) than 81.30% of the peer group. Julian Roberts-Grmela
Author details
Total words: 38,538
Article count: 14
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
19% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 18.7% percentile 1.4% BS Score14 analyzed articles38.5K 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 5.1% 5.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 9.5% 9.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.8% 6.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.0% 3.0% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.7% 1.7% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.4% 1.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.9% 2.9% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.3% 4.3% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.4% 1.4% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.4% 0.4% 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 5.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 9.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.8%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 6.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.3%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 3.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.5%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst