Author summary
⁠0%4 analyzed articles/videos5,005 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ivy Buck results contain 33 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 26.3% saturation with 3,798 hits. Analysis detected 20,440 faulty-reasoning hits from 14,454 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (1,428 of 6,348 authors). This Ivy Buck is worse (more manipulative) than 77.50% of the peer group.
Ivy Buck
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠78%Ivy Buck (selected)5%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 14,454
Article count: 4
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

78% percentile
025507510077.5% percentile
4.3% BS Score4 analyzed articles14.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 6.5%6.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 17.8%17.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.6%0.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 9.5%9.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 12.0%12.0%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Author 0.5%0.5%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Author 4.6%4.6%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Author 0.5%0.5%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Author 0.5%0.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 1.4%1.4%

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 26.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 19.2%Halo Effect: Author 17.8%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Emotion: Author 12.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 12.1%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Author 9.5%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Author 9.1%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 8.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 7.5%Anecdotal: Author 7.0%, sitewide 5.2%In-Group Bias: Author 6.3%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Author 5.6%, sitewide 6.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 4.6%, sitewide 1.9%Anchoring Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Author 2.5%, sitewide 2.2%Loss Aversion: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Pessimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos