Author summary
6% 1 analyzed article/video 687 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Daniel Potter results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Hindsight Bias , and Appeal to Emotion , with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 3.6% saturation with 75 hits . Analysis detected 653 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,061 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of 9% (6,073 of 6,629 authors). This Daniel Potter is better (less manipulative) than 91.60% of the peer group. Daniel Potter
Author details
Total words: 2,061
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
8% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 8.4% percentile 1.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.1K 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 0.6% 0.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.7% 2.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.7% 2.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.0% 2.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.5% 1.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.1% 1.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.9% 1.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 3.6% 3.6% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.7% 0.7% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 1.2% 1.2% 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 0.6%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.7%, sitewide 15.9% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.0%, sitewide 8.1% In-Group Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.9%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.1%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.5%, sitewide 3.3% Hindsight Bias: Author 2.8%, sitewide 1.4% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.9% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 1.1%, sitewide 0.5% Unattributed Quote: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.1% Personal Incredulity: Author 0.1%, sitewide 0.2% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 0.1%, sitewide 0.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst