Author summary
72% 2 analyzed articles/videos 2,656 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Christian Caryl results contain 49 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Optimism Bias , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 12.4% saturation with 1,715 hits . Analysis detected 17,944 faulty-reasoning hits from 13,826 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of 52% (3,104 of 6,350 authors). This Christian Caryl is worse (more manipulative) than 51.10% of the peer group. Christian Caryl
Author details
Total words: 13,826
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
51% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 51.1% percentile 2.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles13.8K 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 3.2% 3.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.1% 8.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 12.4% 12.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.5% 6.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.6% 2.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.8% 4.8% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.4% 0.4% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.1% 0.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 3.2% 3.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 11.5% 11.5% 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 3.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 12.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.1%, sitewide 15.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 11.5%, sitewide 8.1% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.5%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Author 9.3%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.8%, sitewide 9.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 7.8%, sitewide 5.3% Confirmation Bias: Author 7.1%, sitewide 7.5% Overconfidence Bias: Author 7.1%, sitewide 4.6% In-Group Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.2%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Author 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Ad Hominem: Author 4.3%, sitewide 2.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.0% Hindsight Bias: Author 4.0%, sitewide 1.4% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.9%, sitewide 3.3% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 3.1% Recency Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 2.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.9%, sitewide 2.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.6%, sitewide 0.8% Loss Aversion: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst