Author summary
0%1 analyzed article/video638 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Anthony Cotton results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Confirmation Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 47.1% saturation with 902 hits. Analysis detected 5,142 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,914 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 8.1% and a BS Rank of 93% (490 of 6,497 authors). This Anthony Cotton is worse (more manipulative) than 92.50% of the peer group.
Anthony Cotton
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Megan Fan Munce1%
1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
93%Anthony Cotton (selected)9%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 1,914
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

93% percentile
025507510092.5% percentile
8.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 47.1%47.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 27.4%27.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 21.7%21.7%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Author 14.5%14.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Author 8.2%8.2%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Author 8.5%8.5%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Author 9.3%9.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 14.0%14.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 14.6%14.6%Composition/DivisionSitewide 0.2%Author 4.9%4.9%

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 47.1%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 27.4%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 21.7%, sitewide 7.5%Negativity Bias: Author 14.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 13.8%, sitewide 15.9%Anchoring Bias: Author 14.5%, sitewide 4.0%Availability Heuristic: Author 14.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 11.4%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Author 9.9%, sitewide 6.9%Bandwagon: Author 9.3%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Author 8.5%, sitewide 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 8.2%, sitewide 0.8%Optimism Bias: Author 7.6%, sitewide 6.0%Status Quo Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Author 6.2%, sitewide 1.9%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 5.5%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Author 5.4%, sitewide 1.7%Anecdotal: Author 0.9%, sitewide 5.2%Composition/Division: Author 4.9%, sitewide 0.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 4.6%Straw Man: Author 4.1%, sitewide 0.9%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 3.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos