Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 1,574 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hannah Meisel results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Appeal to Authority , and Framing Effect , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 7.2% saturation with 453 hits . Analysis detected 3,925 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,296 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 34% (4,409 of 6,628 authors). This Hannah Meisel is better (less manipulative) than 66.50% of the peer group. Hannah Meisel
Author details
Total words: 6,296
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
34% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 33.5% percentile 2.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles6.3K 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 5.4% 5.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 6.4% 6.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.2% 7.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.4% 0.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.7% 2.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.7% 1.7% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.6% 1.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.0% 6.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.1% 1.1% 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 5.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 6.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 1.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.8%, sitewide 3.3% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.7% Begging the Question: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.7% Bandwagon: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.8% Blind-Spot Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.2% Red Herring: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst