Author summary
91% 1 analyzed article/video 461 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amy Hubbard results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Optimism Bias , and Appeal to Authority , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 20.2% saturation with 279 hits . Analysis detected 1,758 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,383 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.1% and a BS Rank of 84% (1,069 of 6,474 authors). This Amy Hubbard is worse (more manipulative) than 83.50% of the peer group. Amy Hubbard
Author details
Total words: 1,383
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
84% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 83.5% percentile 5.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.4K 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 9.2% 9.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.0% 1.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.2% 1.2% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 11.1% 11.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 8.9% 8.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 20.2% 20.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 16.1% 16.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 2.2% 2.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 8.2% 8.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 3.3% 3.3% 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 9.2%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 20.2%, sitewide 15.9% Negativity Bias: Author 16.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Authority: Author 10.6%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Author 11.1%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 7.0%, sitewide 9.1% Overconfidence Bias: Author 8.9%, sitewide 4.6% Biased Writer Voice: Author 8.2%, sitewide 5.3% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 6.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 5.1%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Author 2.2%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.7%, sitewide 3.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.3%, sitewide 0.8% Recency Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.2%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 1.9% Burden of Proof: Author 1.5%, sitewide 0.4% False Dilemma: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.5% Dunning-Kruger Effect: Author 1.2%, sitewide 0.1% Primacy Effect: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst