Author summary
46% 2 analyzed articles/videos 2,326 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Neal St. Anthony results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Authority , and Halo Effect , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 7.9% saturation with 732 hits . Analysis detected 5,922 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,304 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 27% (6,476 of 8,795 authors). This Neal St. Anthony is better (less manipulative) than 73.60% of the peer group. Neal St. Anthony
Author details
Total words: 9,304
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
26% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 26.4% percentile 1.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles9.3K 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 6.5% 6.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.3% 2.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 3.9% 3.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.9% 0.9% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.1% 2.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.3% 3.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.6% 5.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.1% 2.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.6% 0.6% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.1% 0.1% 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 6.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 3.9%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.1%, sitewide 8.1% Optimism Bias: Author 7.9%, sitewide 6.0% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 4.3%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 2.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.7%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst