Author summary
61% 1 analyzed article/video 787 analyzed words
BS Summary: These James David Dickson results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal , Negativity Bias , and Confirmation Bias , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 15.6% saturation with 491 hits . Analysis detected 3,049 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,148 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of 65% (3,016 of 8,525 authors). This James David Dickson is worse (more manipulative) than 64.60% of the peer group. James David Dickson
Author details
Total words: 3,148
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
65% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 64.6% percentile 2.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.1K 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 4.4% 4.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.1% 2.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 0.7% 0.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.4% 10.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 15.6% 15.6% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 12.1% 12.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.6% 0.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.2% 0.2% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Author 7.0% 7.0% 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 4.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 10.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.1%, sitewide 15.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 15.6%, sitewide 8.1% Anecdotal: Author 12.1%, sitewide 5.2% Appeal to Authority: Author 0.7%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.6%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 8.1%, sitewide 7.5% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 7.0%, sitewide 3.1% In-Group Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.5%, sitewide 5.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 1.4% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.2%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.7% Ad Hominem: Author 2.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst