Author summary
25% 2 analyzed articles/videos 979 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Drew Bonifant results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Halo Effect , and Optimism Bias , with Recency Bias as the most egregious example at 5.6% saturation with 220 hits . Analysis detected 1,811 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,916 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of 41% (5,476 of 9,192 authors). This Drew Bonifant is better (less manipulative) than 59.60% of the peer group. Drew Bonifant
Author details
Total words: 3,916
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
40% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 40.4% percentile 1.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.9K 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 0.4% 0.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 0.3% 0.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 0.4% 0.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.3% 1.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.3% 3.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.3% 5.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.9% 0.9% Recency Bias Sitewide 2.7% Author 5.6% 5.6% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.9% 0.9% 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 0.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 5.1%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 4.2%, sitewide 6.0% Recency Bias: Author 5.6%, sitewide 2.7% Anecdotal: Author 0.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.7% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 3.4%, sitewide 1.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 1.4%, sitewide 1.5% Primacy Effect: Author 0.4%, sitewide 0.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.7%, sitewide 0.8% Special Pleading: Author 0.7%, sitewide 0.3% Composition/Division: Author 0.5%, sitewide 0.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst