Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 658 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emma Noble results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect , Biased Writer Voice , and In-Group Bias , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 7.8% saturation with 206 hits . Analysis detected 1,818 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,632 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of 39% (3,912 of 6,365 authors). This Emma Noble is better (less manipulative) than 61.50% of the peer group. Emma Noble
Author details
Total words: 2,632
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
39% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 38.5% percentile 2.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.6K 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 3.3% 3.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 0.9% 0.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.1% 2.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 0.8% 0.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.6% 2.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.3% 0.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.1% 2.1% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 1.1% 1.1% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 1.1% 1.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 3.0% 3.0% 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 3.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 0.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 7.8%, sitewide 8.1% Halo Effect: Author 7.6%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 7.6%, sitewide 5.3% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.4%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.9%, sitewide 2.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.1%, sitewide 0.8% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.0%, sitewide 1.9% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.0% Begging the Question: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.7% Sunk Cost Effect: Author 1.6%, sitewide 0.3% False Dilemma: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.5% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst