Author summary
23% 2 analyzed articles/videos 484 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jack Dindia results contain 22 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal , Hasty Generalization , and Halo Effect , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 8.6% saturation with 198 hits . Analysis detected 954 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,308 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of 39% (5,611 of 9,087 authors). This Jack Dindia is better (less manipulative) than 61.70% of the peer group. Jack Dindia
Author details
Total words: 2,308
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
38% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 38.3% percentile 1.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles2.3K 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 1.3% 1.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 0.5% 0.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.3% 1.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 0.7% 0.7% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.6% 1.6% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 1.1% 1.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.4% 4.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 3.2% 3.2% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% 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 1.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.3%, sitewide 11.1% Optimism Bias: Author 8.6%, sitewide 6.0% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.2%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 5.1%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 1.0%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.5% Indoctrination: Author 1.3%, sitewide 0.0% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.6%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst