Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 868 analyzed words
BS Summary: These AFP teams in Beirut results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 14.4% saturation with 500 hits . Analysis detected 3,015 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,472 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of 58% (2,810 of 6,600 authors). This AFP teams in Beirut is worse (more manipulative) than 57.40% of the peer group. AFP teams in Beirut
Author details
Total words: 3,472
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
57% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 57.4% percentile 2.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.5K 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 9.3% 9.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 0.7% 0.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 0.7% 0.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.6% 8.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.0% 1.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.3% 0.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.7% 1.7% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.3% 1.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 14.4% 14.4% Pessimism Bias Sitewide 1.9% Author 6.7% 6.7% 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 9.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 14.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.6%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 0.7%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Author 10.7%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 0.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 6.7%, sitewide 1.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 4.3%, sitewide 5.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.7%, sitewide 0.8% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 3.7% Ad Hominem: Author 3.5%, sitewide 2.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.3%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.0%, sitewide 1.5% Composition/Division: Author 1.4%, sitewide 0.2% Hindsight Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.4% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 1.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst