Author summary
⁠0%4 analyzed articles/videos1,750 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Caitlin McCormack results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 13.3% saturation with 1,131 hits. Analysis detected 8,114 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,495 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠46% (3,483 of 6,392 authors). This Caitlin McCormack is better (less manipulative) than 54.50% of the peer group.
Caitlin McCormack
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠46%Caitlin McCormack (selected)3%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 8,495
Article count: 4
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

46% percentile
025507510045.5% percentile
2.4% BS Score4 analyzed articles8.5K 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 8.1%8.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 3.5%3.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 12.4%12.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.7%0.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 3.2%3.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 11.2%11.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 2.1%2.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 2.9%2.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 1.1%1.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Author 0.5%0.5%

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 8.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 12.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 13.3%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Author 11.2%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Author 3.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 3.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 2.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 3.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Author 4.6%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.6%Unattributed Quote: Author 4.2%, sitewide 1.1%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.4%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos