Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video722 analyzed words
BS Summary: These D’Loraine Miranda results contain 16 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Availability Heuristic, and Framing Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 42.3% saturation with 1,221 hits. Analysis detected 2,782 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,888 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 6% and a BS Rank of ⁠88% (818 of 6,358 authors). This D’Loraine Miranda is worse (more manipulative) than 87.10% of the peer group.
D’Loraine Miranda
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠88%D’Loraine Miranda (selected)7%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 2,888
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

87% percentile
025507510087.1% percentile
6.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 42.3%42.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 4.3%4.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 21.4%21.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.3%2.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.5%1.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 1.7%1.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 5.0%5.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Author 4.0%4.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 2.5%2.5%

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%Biased Writer Voice: Author 42.3%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Author 4.3%, sitewide 26.9%Halo Effect: Author 21.4%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.3%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 5.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 0.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Author 2.5%, sitewide 5.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 4.0%, sitewide 0.8%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.9%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.9%Status Quo Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 2.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.5%Indoctrination: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos