Author summary
19% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,673 analyzed words
BS Summary: These St. John Barned-Smith results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Anecdotal , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.1% saturation with 541 hits . Analysis detected 3,232 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,692 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 27% (6,955 of 9,471 authors). This St. John Barned-Smith is better (less manipulative) than 73.40% of the peer group. St. John Barned-Smith
Author details
Total words: 6,692
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
27% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 26.6% percentile 1.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles6.7K 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 3.9% 3.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 8.1% 8.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 5.3% 5.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.0% 3.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 0.3% 0.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.9% 2.9% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.6% 0.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.4% 1.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.5% 3.5% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.6% 0.6% 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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 8.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 0.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.9%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 3.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.7%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 1.0%, sitewide 1.5% Hindsight Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst