Author summary
75% 1 analyzed article/video 1,238 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Edward Zheng results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Indoctrination , and Hasty Generalization , with Overconfidence Bias as the most egregious example at 9.3% saturation with 345 hits . Analysis detected 2,186 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,714 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of 51% (4,408 of 8,982 authors). This Edward Zheng is worse (more manipulative) than 50.90% of the peer group. Edward Zheng
Author details
Total words: 3,714
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
51% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 50.9% percentile 2.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 1.4% 1.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.1% 3.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.3% 1.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.8% 1.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.1% 2.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.4% 0.4% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 5.1% 5.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 9.3% 9.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.9% 4.9% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 2.3% 2.3% 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 1.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.8%, sitewide 11.1% Overconfidence Bias: Author 9.3%, sitewide 4.6% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 6.3%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 4.7%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 2.3%, sitewide 5.2% Indoctrination: Author 5.1%, sitewide 0.0% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 3.3%, sitewide 2.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.3% Loss Aversion: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Slippery Slope: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.7% Begging the Question: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.5% Sunk Cost Effect: Author 0.7%, sitewide 0.3% Burden of Proof: Author 0.4%, sitewide 0.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst