Author summary
0%1 analyzed article/video1,077 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Elaine Kurtenbach results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Negativity Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 39.8% saturation with 1,287 hits. Analysis detected 7,188 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,231 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 7.9% and a BS Rank of 93% (525 of 6,628 authors). This Elaine Kurtenbach is worse (more manipulative) than 92.10% of the peer group.
Elaine Kurtenbach
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Jacob Owens1%
1%Megan Fan Munce1%
93%Elaine Kurtenbach (selected)8%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 3,231
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

92% percentile
025507510092.1% percentile
7.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Author 22.2%22.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 28.6%28.6%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Author 21.2%21.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 0.6%0.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 23.3%23.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 39.8%39.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 27.6%27.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.1%1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 9.3%9.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 3.2%3.2%

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 39.8%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 28.6%, sitewide 11.1%Negativity Bias: Author 27.6%, sitewide 19.2%Availability Heuristic: Author 23.3%, sitewide 9.1%Pessimism Bias: Author 22.2%, sitewide 1.9%Anchoring Bias: Author 21.2%, sitewide 4.0%Appeal to Emotion: Author 0.6%, sitewide 15.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 9.3%, sitewide 3.3%Hasty Generalization: Author 3.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 6.9%Recency Bias: Author 6.6%, sitewide 2.7%Optimism Bias: Author 6.3%, sitewide 6.0%Overconfidence Bias: Author 5.7%, sitewide 4.6%Slippery Slope: Author 5.6%, sitewide 1.7%Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 0.9%, sitewide 5.2%Unattributed Quote: Author 4.1%, sitewide 1.1%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 1.4%Status Quo Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos