Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These David Malcolm results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Biased Writer Voice , and Indoctrination , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 20.2% saturation with 320 hits . Analysis detected 3,232 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,584 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,350 authors). This David Malcolm is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. David Malcolm
Author details
Total words: 1,584
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% 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% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 15.3% 15.3% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 12.4% 12.4% Slippery Slope Sitewide 1.7% Author 14.2% 14.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 8.7% 8.7% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 15.4% 15.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 16.8% 16.8% False Dilemma Sitewide 1.5% Author 10.2% 10.2% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 9.7% 9.7% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 8.8% 8.8% Pessimism Bias Sitewide 1.9% Author 6.3% 6.3% 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 12.4%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 20.2%, sitewide 15.9% Negativity Bias: Author 8.7%, sitewide 19.2% Hasty Generalization: Author 16.8%, sitewide 8.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 15.4%, sitewide 5.3% Indoctrination: Author 15.3%, sitewide 0.0% Slippery Slope: Author 14.2%, sitewide 1.7% Appeal to Authority: Author 7.4%, sitewide 11.1% False Dilemma: Author 10.2%, sitewide 1.5% Self-Serving Bias: Author 9.7%, sitewide 3.7% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.9%, sitewide 9.1% Anecdotal: Author 9.0%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 8.8%, sitewide 3.3% Confirmation Bias: Author 8.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 6.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 6.3%, sitewide 1.9% Optimism Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 6.0% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 4.6% Status Quo Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.8%, sitewide 1.9% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.5% Burden of Proof: Author 2.4%, sitewide 0.4% Middle Ground: Author 2.4%, sitewide 0.1% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst