Author summary
0% 5 analyzed articles/videos 927 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Alina Kim results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Authority , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 52.5% saturation with 1,152 hits . Analysis detected 7,114 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,194 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 7.7% and a BS Rank of 92% (543 of 6,517 authors). This Alina Kim is worse (more manipulative) than 91.70% of the peer group. Alina Kim
Author details
Total words: 2,194
Article count: 5
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
92% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 91.7% percentile 7.7% BS Score5 analyzed articles2.2K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 52.5% 52.5% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 52.2% 52.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 28.6% 28.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 19.7% 19.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 28.1% 28.1% Quote-first Misdirection Sitewide 0.0% Author 6.6% 6.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 14.5% 14.5% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Author 8.6% 8.6% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.6% 0.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 11.0% 11.0% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Negativity Bias: Author 52.5%, sitewide 19.2% Framing Effect: Author 52.2%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 28.6%, sitewide 11.1% Appeal to Emotion: Author 28.1%, sitewide 15.9% Confirmation Bias: Author 19.7%, sitewide 7.5% Hasty Generalization: Author 14.5%, sitewide 8.1% In-Group Bias: Author 11.0%, sitewide 6.9% Availability Heuristic: Author 6.2%, sitewide 9.1% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 8.6%, sitewide 3.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 7.1%, sitewide 5.3% Halo Effect: Author 7.0%, sitewide 6.7% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 6.6%, sitewide 0.0% Optimism Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 6.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 5.7%, sitewide 2.7% Begging the Question: Author 5.4%, sitewide 1.7% Recency Bias: Author 5.4%, sitewide 2.7% Anecdotal: Author 0.6%, sitewide 5.2% Ad Hominem: Author 5.2%, sitewide 2.2% False Dilemma: Author 4.8%, sitewide 1.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 4.8%, sitewide 0.8% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 4.6% Bandwagon: Author 4.3%, sitewide 2.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.2%, sitewide 3.3% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 4.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst