Author summary
⁠0%5 analyzed articles/videos2,504 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jami Ganz results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Negativity Bias, and Framing Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 14.1% saturation with 1,294 hits. Analysis detected 13,508 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,153 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠67% (2,045 of 6,162 authors). This Jami Ganz is worse (more manipulative) than 66.80% of the peer group.
Jami Ganz
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠67%Jami Ganz (selected)4%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 9,153
Article count: 5
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

67% percentile
025507510066.8% percentile
3.4% BS Score5 analyzed articles9.2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 11.5%11.5%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 14.1%14.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 12.5%12.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 1.8%1.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 10.9%10.9%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Author 5.3%5.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 2.0%2.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 9.8%9.8%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Author 0.6%0.6%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Author 4.8%4.8%

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 11.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 12.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 10.9%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Author 14.1%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Authority: Author 12.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 10.8%, sitewide 9.1%Halo Effect: Author 9.8%, sitewide 6.7%Confirmation Bias: Author 8.6%, sitewide 7.5%Hasty Generalization: Author 6.5%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 6.0%Unattributed Quote: Author 5.3%, sitewide 1.1%Anecdotal: Author 3.5%, sitewide 5.2%Bandwagon: Author 4.8%, sitewide 2.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.9%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.0%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.5%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.3%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos