Author summary
75% 7 analyzed articles/videos 1,852 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Daniel Hampton results contain 46 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Biased Writer Voice , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 18.1% saturation with 1,780 hits . Analysis detected 11,743 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,845 analyzed words across 7 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.6% and a BS Rank of 50% (3,210 of 6,359 authors). This Daniel Hampton is better (less manipulative) than 50.50% of the peer group. Daniel Hampton
Author details
Total words: 9,845
Article count: 7
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
50% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 49.5% percentile 2.6% BS Score7 analyzed articles9.8K 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 11.7% 11.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.7% 8.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.1% 5.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.9% 0.9% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.4% 0.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.4% 1.4% Quote-first Misdirection Sitewide 0.0% Author 5.1% 5.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.3% 0.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.8% 3.8% 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 11.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 18.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.6%, sitewide 8.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 7.6%, sitewide 5.3% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.0% Ad Hominem: Author 5.6%, sitewide 2.2% Anecdotal: Author 5.6%, sitewide 5.2% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 5.1%, sitewide 0.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.0%, sitewide 3.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 4.6% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 2.0% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.5%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst