Author summary
0% 38 analyzed articles/videos 26,863 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hugo Rikard-Bell results contain 54 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Negativity Bias , and Hasty Generalization , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 7.2% saturation with 9,782 hits . Analysis detected 115,781 faulty-reasoning hits from 136,446 analyzed words across 38 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 15% (5,427 of 6,361 authors). This Hugo Rikard-Bell is better (less manipulative) than 85.30% of the peer group. Hugo Rikard-Bell
Author details
Total words: 136,446
Article count: 38
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
15% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 14.7% percentile 1.6% BS Score38 analyzed articles136.4K 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 7.2% 7.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 5.4% 5.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.7% 6.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.5% 3.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.4% 1.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.0% 2.0% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.1% 3.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.7% 4.7% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 1.3% 1.3% 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 7.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 5.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.0%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 4.0%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 3.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 4.2%, sitewide 3.7% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.2%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.1% False Dilemma: Author 2.8%, sitewide 1.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.5% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.3%, sitewide 0.8% Bandwagon: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst