Author summary
84% 1 analyzed article/video 693 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Elena Metinidis results contain 22 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Framing Effect , and Begging the Question , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 22.9% saturation with 476 hits . Analysis detected 1,601 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,079 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.5% and a BS Rank of 69% (2,097 of 6,628 authors). This Elena Metinidis is worse (more manipulative) than 68.40% of the peer group. Elena Metinidis
Author details
Total words: 2,079
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
68% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 68.4% percentile 3.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.1K 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 6.4% 6.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.4% 2.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 22.9% 22.9% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.3% 1.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.3% 2.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.8% 1.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 13.7% 13.7% Begging the Question Sitewide 1.7% Author 6.2% 6.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.5% 2.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.3% 1.3% 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 6.4%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 22.9%, sitewide 15.9% Negativity Bias: Author 13.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 2.5%, sitewide 6.7% Begging the Question: Author 6.2%, sitewide 1.7% Anecdotal: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 4.0% Pessimism Bias: Author 3.3%, sitewide 1.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.3% Loss Aversion: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 2.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.9% False Dilemma: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.5% No True Scotsman: Author 1.1%, sitewide 0.1% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.0% Straw Man: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.7%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst