Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video81 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emily Yahr results contain 15 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Halo Effect, and Optimism Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 22.2% saturation with 72 hits. Analysis detected 512 faulty-reasoning hits from 324 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 10.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠95% (317 of 6,348 authors). This Emily Yahr is worse (more manipulative) than 95.00% of the peer group.
Emily Yahr
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠95%Emily Yahr (selected)11%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 324
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

95% percentile
025507510095.0% percentile
10.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles324 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 7.7%7.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 22.2%22.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 19.1%19.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 16.1%16.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 16.1%16.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 8.0%8.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Author 8.0%8.0%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Author 9.6%9.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 14.2%14.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 8.0%8.0%

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 7.7%, sitewide 26.9%Biased Writer Voice: Author 22.2%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Author 19.1%, sitewide 8.1%Halo Effect: Author 16.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 16.1%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.0%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Author 14.2%, sitewide 9.1%Appeal to Authority: Author 7.4%, sitewide 11.1%Recency Bias: Author 9.6%, sitewide 2.7%In-Group Bias: Author 8.0%, sitewide 6.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 8.0%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Author 8.0%, sitewide 1.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 7.4%, sitewide 7.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.1%, sitewide 0.8%Pessimism Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos