Author summary
⁠16%1 analyzed article/video1,222 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Laurel Elder results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Framing Effect, and Politically Left Leaning Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 7.6% saturation with 372 hits. Analysis detected 2,098 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,888 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠28% (6,810 of 9,454 authors). This Laurel Elder is better (less manipulative) than 72.00% of the peer group.
Laurel Elder
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠28%Laurel Elder (selected)2%
⁠100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 4,888
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

28% percentile
025507510028.0% percentile
1.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.9K 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 4.1%4.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 1.5%1.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.2%1.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 0.6%0.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.1%2.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.2%1.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 2.7%2.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 0.5%0.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 7.6%7.6%

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 4.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 0.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 2.7%, sitewide 8.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 7.6%, sitewide 3.3%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 0.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 2.0%Recency Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos