Author summary
92% 4 analyzed articles/videos 1,499 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Liz Napolitano results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Post Hoc (False Cause) , and Appeal to Authority , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 27.7% saturation with 1,904 hits . Analysis detected 7,446 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,863 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.6% and a BS Rank of 79% (2,021 of 9,490 authors). This Liz Napolitano is worse (more manipulative) than 78.70% of the peer group. Liz Napolitano
Author details
Total words: 6,863
Article count: 4
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
79% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 78.7% percentile 3.6% BS Score4 analyzed articles6.9K 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 1.2% 1.2% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 27.7% 27.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.6% 2.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 0.6% 0.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.3% 2.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.3% 0.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 14.0% 14.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.6% 6.6% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.1% 1.1% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 7.0% 7.0% 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% Optimism Bias: Author 27.7%, sitewide 6.0% Framing Effect: Author 1.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 0.6%, sitewide 15.9% Confirmation Bias: Author 14.0%, sitewide 7.5% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.5%, sitewide 8.1% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 7.0%, sitewide 3.3% In-Group Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 4.5%, sitewide 6.7% Anchoring Bias: Author 5.9%, sitewide 4.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.7%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.1%, sitewide 5.2% Recency Bias: Author 4.7%, sitewide 2.7% Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.7% Bandwagon: Author 3.6%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.5%, sitewide 0.8% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.5% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.4%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.9% Optimism Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst