Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 1,542 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Christine Mai-Duc results contain 41 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Hasty Generalization , with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 11% saturation with 678 hits . Analysis detected 6,468 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,168 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of 49% (3,212 of 6,259 authors). This Christine Mai-Duc is better (less manipulative) than 51.30% of the peer group. Christine Mai-Duc
Author details
Total words: 6,168
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
49% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 48.7% percentile 2.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles6.2K 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 9.4% 9.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.7% 4.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.5% 1.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.4% 3.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 10.2% 10.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 0.1% 0.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.4% 0.4% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.3% 1.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.6% 2.6% Quote-first Misdirection Sitewide 0.0% Author 3.1% 3.1% 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 9.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 10.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 11.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 5.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.4%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.2%, sitewide 3.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 4.0% Recency Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 2.7% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 3.7% False Dilemma: Author 3.6%, sitewide 1.5% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 3.1% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 3.1%, sitewide 0.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.5% Slippery Slope: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst