Author summary
43% 2 analyzed articles/videos 2,026 analyzed words
BS Summary: These WPR results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , In-Group Bias , and Negativity Bias , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 722 hits . Analysis detected 4,997 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,104 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 26% (6,514 of 8,797 authors). This WPR is better (less manipulative) than 74.00% of the peer group. WPR
Author details
Total words: 8,104
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
26% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 26.0% percentile 1.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles8.1K 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 5.2% 5.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.7% 1.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.9% 8.9% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.3% 2.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.6% 0.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.6% 1.6% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 0.4% 0.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.5% 3.5% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.5% 1.5% 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 5.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.9%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.7%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 4.8%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 2.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.1% False Dilemma: Author 2.8%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.5%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 2.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.2% Indoctrination: Author 2.2%, sitewide 0.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst