Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Esther Launstein results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Primacy Effect, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 5.8% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 163 faulty-reasoning hits from 970 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 9,023 authors). This Esther Launstein is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Esther Launstein
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Tabitha Mueller1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
⁠0%Esther Launstein (selected)0%
Author details
Total words: 970
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles970 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.9%2.9%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 0.7%0.7%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Author 5.2%5.2%Primacy EffectSitewide 0.9%Author 2.3%2.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 5.8%5.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%5%5%10%10%15%15%20%20%25%25%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.9%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Author 5.8%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 5.2%, sitewide 3.7%Primacy Effect: Author 2.3%, sitewide 0.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos