Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Callie Ahlgrim results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Authority , and Confirmation Bias , with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 3.8% saturation with 811 hits . Analysis detected 4,894 faulty-reasoning hits from 21,585 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,629 authors). This Callie Ahlgrim is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Callie Ahlgrim
Author details
Total words: 21,585
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles21.6K 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 2.5% 2.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 0.5% 0.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 0.7% 0.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.4% 2.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.1% 1.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.0% 1.0% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.6% 1.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.3% 0.3% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 0.1% 0.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.4% 0.4% 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 2.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 0.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 3.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.5% Hindsight Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.4% Primacy Effect: Author 0.1%, sitewide 0.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.7%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst