Author summary
90% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,508 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hannah Ellis-Petersen results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Negativity Bias , and Appeal to Emotion , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 22.1% saturation with 1,002 hits . Analysis detected 4,305 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,524 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3% and a BS Rank of 60% (2,688 of 6,628 authors). This Hannah Ellis-Petersen is worse (more manipulative) than 59.50% of the peer group. Hannah Ellis-Petersen
Author details
Total words: 4,524
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
60% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 59.5% percentile 3.0% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.5K 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% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 16.3% 16.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 9.0% 9.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.7% 6.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.0% 2.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.1% 2.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.7% 1.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.3% 3.3% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 22.1% 22.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.1% 3.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.8% 1.8% 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 22.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 9.0%, sitewide 19.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 16.3%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.0%, sitewide 3.3% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.1% Recency Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 2.2%, sitewide 2.2% Hindsight Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 1.4% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst