Author summary
30% 1 analyzed article/video 656 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Rachel Diamond Ph.D. results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination , False Dilemma , and Optimism Bias , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 7% saturation with 369 hits . Analysis detected 2,603 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,296 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 35% (6,196 of 9,471 authors). This Rachel Diamond Ph.D. is better (less manipulative) than 65.40% of the peer group. Rachel Diamond Ph.D.
Author details
Total words: 5,296
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
35% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 34.6% percentile 1.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.3K 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 2.8% 2.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.4% 2.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 0.7% 0.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.3% 1.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.4% 0.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.4% 1.4% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 5.8% 5.8% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.4% 0.4% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 0.4% 0.4% 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 2.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 0.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 7.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 6.0% Indoctrination: Author 5.8%, sitewide 0.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.7% False Dilemma: Author 3.6%, sitewide 1.5% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.7% Unattributed Quote: Author 1.4%, sitewide 1.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.8%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst