Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 984 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Isabella O'Malley results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Optimism Bias , and Confirmation Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 39.2% saturation with 1,156 hits . Analysis detected 4,307 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,952 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 6.3% and a BS Rank of 89% (757 of 6,628 authors). This Isabella O'Malley is worse (more manipulative) than 88.60% of the peer group. Isabella O'Malley
Author details
Total words: 2,952
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
89% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 88.6% percentile 6.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles3K 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% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 1.1% 1.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 21.2% 21.2% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 39.2% 39.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 23.2% 23.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.0% 7.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.6% 4.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 3.0% 3.0% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.5% 4.5% Appeal to Nature Sitewide 0.2% Author 2.5% 2.5% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 5.8% 5.8% 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 39.2%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 23.2%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Author 21.2%, sitewide 6.0% Negativity Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.0%, sitewide 15.9% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 7.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 6.9% Self-Serving Bias: Author 5.8%, sitewide 3.7% Overconfidence Bias: Author 5.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anecdotal: Author 4.8%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.0%, sitewide 3.3% Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.5% Appeal to Nature: Author 2.5%, sitewide 0.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.2% Bandwagon: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 1.4%, sitewide 1.7% Special Pleading: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.3% Blind-Spot Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 0.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst