Author summary
0% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,041 analyzed words
BS Summary: These James Gant results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.5% saturation with 746 hits . Analysis detected 3,559 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,473 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.2% and a BS Rank of 64% (2,419 of 6,628 authors). This James Gant is worse (more manipulative) than 63.50% of the peer group. James Gant
Author details
Total words: 3,473
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
64% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 63.5% percentile 3.2% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.5K 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 8.2% 8.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 16.1% 16.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.7% 7.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.6% 4.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.6% 0.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.6% 2.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.4% 1.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.2% 4.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.9% 2.9% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% 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 8.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 21.5%, sitewide 19.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 16.1%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.6%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 4.0%, sitewide 3.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.3%, sitewide 0.8% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 2.7% Begging the Question: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Red Herring: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.7% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst