Author summary
12% 3 analyzed articles/videos 1,218 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Daniel Caudill results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Halo Effect , and Hasty Generalization , with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 4.8% saturation with 345 hits . Analysis detected 3,350 faulty-reasoning hits from 7,119 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 12% (5,444 of 6,134 authors). This Daniel Caudill is better (less manipulative) than 88.70% of the peer group. Daniel Caudill
Author details
Total words: 7,119
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
11% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 11.3% percentile 1.5% BS Score3 analyzed articles7.1K 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% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 4.7% 4.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.3% 2.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.0% 2.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.8% 4.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.4% 1.4% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.0% 1.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.5% 2.5% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 0.8% 0.8% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.0% 1.0% 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 4.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.8%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.5% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 1.9% Bandwagon: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.2%, sitewide 0.8% False Dilemma: Author 2.1%, sitewide 1.5% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst