Author summary
79%1 analyzed article/video843 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Neil Winton results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Hasty Generalization, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19% saturation with 641 hits. Analysis detected 3,758 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,372 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.6% and a BS Rank of 79% (2,051 of 9,487 authors). This Neil Winton is worse (more manipulative) than 78.40% of the peer group.
Neil Winton
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Hannah Martin1%
0%Paul DeMark1%
0%Emma Sedlak1%
0%Michael Fox1%
0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
79%Neil Winton (selected)4%
100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 3,372
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

78% percentile
025507510078.4% percentile
3.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.4K 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 6.7%6.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 7.2%7.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 14.0%14.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.0%2.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.9%0.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 1.0%1.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 6.4%6.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 0.6%0.6%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Author 5.1%5.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 2.3%2.3%

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 6.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 19.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.2%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Author 14.0%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Author 6.4%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 8.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 6.1%, sitewide 2.7%Optimism Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 6.0%Unattributed Quote: Author 5.1%, sitewide 1.1%Pessimism Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 1.9%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 4.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 4.1%, sitewide 0.8%Anchoring Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.0%Quote-first Misdirection: Author 3.4%, sitewide 0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.5%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Hindsight Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 1.4%False Dilemma: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.5%Bandwagon: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos