Author summary
78% 1 analyzed article/video 1,698 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chance Townsend results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Negativity Bias , and Availability Heuristic , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 37.1% saturation with 1,889 hits . Analysis detected 6,222 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,094 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.6% and a BS Rank of 70% (2,001 of 6,630 authors). This Chance Townsend is worse (more manipulative) than 69.80% of the peer group. Chance Townsend
Author details
Total words: 5,094
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
70% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 69.8% percentile 3.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.1K 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% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 37.1% 37.1% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 0.8% 0.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 9.0% 9.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.0% 2.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.3% 1.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.7% 2.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 11.3% 11.3% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.0% 1.0% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.8% 0.8% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 3.5% 3.5% 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% Biased Writer Voice: Author 37.1%, sitewide 5.3% Framing Effect: Author 0.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 9.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 11.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 7.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 6.5%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 5.5%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.4%, sitewide 3.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.7% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 3.5%, sitewide 1.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.5%, sitewide 0.8% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 2.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.0% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.7% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst