Author summary
⁠0%5 analyzed articles/videos3,333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Bente Birkeland results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 20.8% saturation with 2,317 hits. Analysis detected 13,164 faulty-reasoning hits from 11,123 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠56% (2,842 of 6,357 authors). This Bente Birkeland is worse (more manipulative) than 55.30% of the peer group.
Bente Birkeland
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠56%Bente Birkeland (selected)3%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 11,123
Article count: 5
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

55% percentile
025507510055.3% percentile
2.8% BS Score5 analyzed articles11.1K 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 20.8%20.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 9.9%9.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 2.6%2.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 3.9%3.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 0.7%0.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 1.1%1.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 15.4%15.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 3.7%3.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 7.8%7.8%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 1.6%1.6%

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 20.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 15.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 9.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 7.8%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 3.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 2.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 4.8%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 4.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 1.1%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.8%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 3.0%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 2.8%, sitewide 2.5%Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Status Quo Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.2%Bandwagon: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Author 2.2%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos