Author summary
6% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,221 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emily Margaretten results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Framing Effect , and Confirmation Bias , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 3.6% saturation with 222 hits . Analysis detected 957 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,108 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.7% and a BS Rank of 2% (8,944 of 9,058 authors). This Emily Margaretten is better (less manipulative) than 98.70% of the peer group. Emily Margaretten
Author details
Total words: 6,108
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
1% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 1.3% percentile 0.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles6.1K 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 1.5% 1.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.4% 2.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 0.4% 0.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 0.3% 0.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 0.3% 0.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 0.8% 0.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.3% 0.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.5% 0.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.1% 0.1% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% 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 1.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Authority: Author 0.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 0.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 0.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 0.1%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 0.1%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.5% Unattributed Quote: Author 0.1%, sitewide 1.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.1%, sitewide 0.8% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 0.4%, sitewide 0.5% Special Pleading: Author 0.4%, sitewide 0.3% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst