Author summary
80%1 analyzed article/video1,552 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emma Gallegos results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Appeal to Authority, and Negativity Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 11% saturation with 1,017 hits. Analysis detected 7,118 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,279 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of 42% (3,660 of 6,263 authors). This Emma Gallegos is better (less manipulative) than 58.40% of the peer group.
Emma Gallegos
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Megan Fan Munce1%
1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
42%Emma Gallegos (selected)3%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 9,279
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

42% percentile
025507510041.6% percentile
2.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles9.3K 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 5.7%5.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 8.4%8.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.9%0.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.9%2.9%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 11.0%11.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 2.6%2.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 10.9%10.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 1.2%1.2%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 0.9%0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Author 0.7%0.7%

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 5.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 8.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 10.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 10.2%, sitewide 11.1%Anecdotal: Author 11.0%, sitewide 5.2%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 2.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 7.5%Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.2%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.3%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.7%Unattributed Quote: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos