Author summary
70% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,734 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Robert Triggs results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Framing Effect , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 12.7% saturation with 882 hits . Analysis detected 7,282 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,936 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of 64% (3,437 of 9,307 authors). This Robert Triggs is worse (more manipulative) than 63.10% of the peer group. Robert Triggs
Author details
Total words: 6,936
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
63% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 63.1% percentile 2.7% BS Score2 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 5.8% 5.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.5% 1.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.7% 10.7% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 12.7% 12.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 4.8% 4.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.9% 2.9% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 3.9% 3.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.9% 2.9% 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 5.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 10.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 3.9%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 12.7%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 7.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.5%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 4.6% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 4.8%, sitewide 0.8% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.0% False Dilemma: Author 4.0%, sitewide 1.5% Indoctrination: Author 3.9%, sitewide 0.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.1%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.1% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.9% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 2.6%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst