Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 573 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Anika Besst results contain 21 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias , Appeal to Emotion , and Appeal to Authority , with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 58.6% saturation with 1,007 hits . Analysis detected 3,518 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,719 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 9.7% and a BS Rank of 95% (369 of 6,628 authors). This Anika Besst is worse (more manipulative) than 94.40% of the peer group. Anika Besst
Author details
Total words: 1,719
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
94% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 94.4% percentile 9.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.7K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 58.6% 58.6% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 5.3% 5.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 27.8% 27.8% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 18.3% 18.3% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 17.3% 17.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 18.9% 18.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 0.6% 0.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 20.2% 20.2% Hindsight Bias Sitewide 1.4% Author 5.1% 5.1% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Halo Effect: Author 58.6%, sitewide 6.7% In-Group Bias: Author 27.8%, sitewide 6.9% Framing Effect: Author 5.3%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 20.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 18.9%, sitewide 11.1% Anecdotal: Author 18.3%, sitewide 5.2% Optimism Bias: Author 17.3%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 5.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 7.5% Anchoring Bias: Author 5.9%, sitewide 4.0% Bandwagon: Author 5.3%, sitewide 2.2% Hindsight Bias: Author 5.1%, sitewide 1.4% Recency Bias: Author 4.9%, sitewide 2.7% Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 3.7% Primacy Effect: Author 3.3%, sitewide 0.9% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.5% Composition/Division: Author 0.6%, sitewide 0.2% Halo Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst