Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 613 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chuck Murphy results contain 20 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Negativity Bias , and Status Quo Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 57.7% saturation with 708 hits . Analysis detected 2,509 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,226 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 10.2% and a BS Rank of 95% (346 of 6,628 authors). This Chuck Murphy is worse (more manipulative) than 94.80% of the peer group. Chuck Murphy
Author details
Total words: 1,226
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
95% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 94.8% percentile 10.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.2K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 57.8% 57.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 26.4% 26.4% Status Quo Bias Sitewide 2.2% Author 14.6% 14.6% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Author 8.9% 8.9% Begging the Question Sitewide 1.7% Author 7.0% 7.0% Straw Man Sitewide 0.9% Author 6.0% 6.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 11.5% 11.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 10.9% 10.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 22.0% 22.0% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Author 4.2% 4.2% 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 57.8%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 26.4%, sitewide 11.1% Negativity Bias: Author 22.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 11.5%, sitewide 15.9% Status Quo Bias: Author 14.6%, sitewide 2.2% In-Group Bias: Author 10.9%, sitewide 6.9% Confirmation Bias: Author 9.3%, sitewide 7.5% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 8.9%, sitewide 3.1% Begging the Question: Author 7.0%, sitewide 1.7% Halo Effect: Author 5.3%, sitewide 6.7% Straw Man: Author 6.0%, sitewide 0.9% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 4.6% Ad Hominem: Author 4.2%, sitewide 2.2% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 3.3%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 3.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.5%, sitewide 0.8% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.9% Genetic Fallacy: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.4% Slippery Slope: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst