Author summary
38% 2 analyzed articles/videos 2,360 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Murphy results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Recency Bias , and Framing Effect , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 7.2% saturation with 682 hits . Analysis detected 6,570 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,440 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.8% and a BS Rank of 25% (4,892 of 6,464 authors). This David Murphy is better (less manipulative) than 75.70% of the peer group. David Murphy
Author details
Total words: 9,440
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
24% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 24.3% percentile 1.8% BS Score2 analyzed articles9.4K 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 5.1% 5.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.6% 4.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.0% 2.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.8% 1.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.4% 1.4% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.9% 0.9% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 2.5% 2.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 3.4% 3.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 4.2% 4.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 3.4% 3.4% 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 5.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 7.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 4.2%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 3.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.9%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.9%, sitewide 5.2% Recency Bias: Author 5.2%, sitewide 2.7% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 4.0% Indoctrination: Author 3.4%, sitewide 0.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.5%, sitewide 3.3% False Dilemma: Author 3.2%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.1%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst