Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 795 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Bianculli results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Confirmation Bias , and Recency Bias , with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 37.7% saturation with 599 hits . Analysis detected 3,436 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,590 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 8.3% and a BS Rank of 93% (482 of 6,628 authors). This David Bianculli is worse (more manipulative) than 92.70% of the peer group. David Bianculli
Author details
Total words: 1,590
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
93% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 92.7% percentile 8.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.6K 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% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 37.7% 37.7% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 4.7% 4.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 28.2% 28.2% Recency Bias Sitewide 2.7% Author 15.9% 15.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 18.0% 18.0% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 11.6% 11.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 14.9% 14.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 10.3% 10.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 13.7% 13.7% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 9.6% 9.6% 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% Halo Effect: Author 37.7%, sitewide 6.7% Appeal to Authority: Author 28.2%, sitewide 11.1% Framing Effect: Author 4.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 13.7%, sitewide 19.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 18.0%, sitewide 7.5% Appeal to Emotion: Author 10.3%, sitewide 15.9% Recency Bias: Author 15.9%, sitewide 2.7% Availability Heuristic: Author 14.9%, sitewide 9.1% Anecdotal: Author 11.6%, sitewide 5.2% Hasty Generalization: Author 10.8%, sitewide 8.1% Overconfidence Bias: Author 9.6%, sitewide 4.6% Optimism Bias: Author 7.6%, sitewide 6.0% In-Group Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 6.9% Anchoring Bias: Author 5.9%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 4.2%, sitewide 3.7% Bandwagon: Author 3.4%, sitewide 2.2% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.1% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.9% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.9% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.7% Primacy Effect: Author 1.4%, sitewide 0.9% Sunk Cost Effect: Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.8% Halo Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst