Author summary
0% 2 analyzed articles/videos 161 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chandra Thomas Whitfield results contain 19 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias , Appeal to Emotion , and Halo Effect , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 64% saturation with 309 hits . Analysis detected 2,060 faulty-reasoning hits from 483 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 22.4% and a BS Rank of 100% (47 of 6,215 authors). This Chandra Thomas Whitfield is worse (more manipulative) than 99.30% of the peer group. Chandra Thomas Whitfield
Author details
Total words: 483
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
99% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 99.3% percentile 22.4% BS Score2 analyzed articles483 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 55.9% 55.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 52.2% 52.2% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 64.0% 64.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 52.8% 52.8% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 32.9% 32.9% Bandwagon Sitewide 2.2% Author 29.0% 29.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 36.9% 36.9% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 18.6% 18.6% Recency Bias Sitewide 2.7% Author 10.1% 10.1% Primacy Effect Sitewide 0.9% Author 5.4% 5.4% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Framing Effect: Author 64.0%, sitewide 26.9% In-Group Bias: Author 55.9%, sitewide 6.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 52.8%, sitewide 15.9% Halo Effect: Author 52.2%, sitewide 6.7% Appeal to Authority: Author 36.9%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Author 32.9%, sitewide 6.0% Bandwagon: Author 29.0%, sitewide 2.2% Negativity Bias: Author 15.5%, sitewide 19.2% Anecdotal: Author 18.6%, sitewide 5.2% Hasty Generalization: Author 10.3%, sitewide 8.1% Recency Bias: Author 10.1%, sitewide 2.7% Confirmation Bias: Author 9.5%, sitewide 7.5% Availability Heuristic: Author 8.7%, sitewide 9.1% Anchoring Bias: Author 7.0%, sitewide 4.0% Primacy Effect: Author 5.4%, sitewide 0.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.2%, sitewide 3.3% Ad Hominem: Author 4.8%, sitewide 2.2% Genetic Fallacy: Author 4.8%, sitewide 1.4% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst