Author summary
40% 3 analyzed articles/videos 1,693 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Guardian staff results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Appeal to Authority , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.7% saturation with 621 hits . Analysis detected 3,353 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,797 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.7% and a BS Rank of 18% (5,204 of 6,316 authors). This Guardian staff is better (less manipulative) than 82.40% of the peer group. Guardian staff
Author details
Total words: 5,797
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
18% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 17.6% percentile 1.7% BS Score3 analyzed articles5.8K 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 8.8% 8.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.8% 6.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.7% 10.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 0.7% 0.7% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.3% 0.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.8% 1.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.5% 5.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.3% 2.3% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.3% 0.3% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.7% 1.7% 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 8.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 10.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.8%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 0.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.0%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.8%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.5% Genetic Fallacy: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst