Author summary
0% 3 analyzed articles/videos 1,395 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emily Conover results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Authority , and Overconfidence Bias , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 7.2% saturation with 402 hits . Analysis detected 3,738 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,580 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2% and a BS Rank of 30% (4,485 of 6,348 authors). This Emily Conover is better (less manipulative) than 70.60% of the peer group. Emily Conover
Author details
Total words: 5,580
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
29% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 29.4% percentile 2.0% BS Score3 analyzed articles5.6K 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 7.0% 7.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.2% 4.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 3.3% 3.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.9% 2.9% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.0% 1.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.8% 2.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.8% 6.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.4% 3.4% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.3% 1.3% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.3% 0.3% 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 7.0%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.2%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 3.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Author 7.2%, sitewide 6.0% Halo Effect: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.7%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.9%, sitewide 3.3% Recency Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.5% Loss Aversion: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.9% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 1.7%, sitewide 0.0% Slippery Slope: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.7% Begging the Question: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst