Author summary
52% 4 analyzed articles/videos 3,171 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Nathalie Graham results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Ad Hominem , and Appeal to Emotion , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 17% saturation with 2,268 hits . Analysis detected 11,301 faulty-reasoning hits from 13,328 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 46% (4,689 of 8,538 authors). This Nathalie Graham is better (less manipulative) than 54.90% of the peer group. Nathalie Graham
Author details
Total words: 13,328
Article count: 4
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
45% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 45.1% percentile 2.1% BS Score4 analyzed articles13.3K 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% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 17.0% 17.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 5.1% 5.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.8% 2.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 12.5% 12.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.4% 0.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.5% 1.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.4% 2.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.0% 4.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.0% 1.0% 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 12.5%, sitewide 19.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 17.0%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.0%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.9% Ad Hominem: Author 6.8%, sitewide 2.2% Halo Effect: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.1%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% False Dilemma: Author 2.0%, sitewide 1.5% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.0% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst