Author summary
70% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,787 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Julian Chokkattu results contain 38 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Anecdotal , and Post Hoc (False Cause) , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 7.3% saturation with 644 hits . Analysis detected 7,088 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,868 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 34% (4,181 of 6,325 authors). This Julian Chokkattu is better (less manipulative) than 66.10% of the peer group. Julian Chokkattu
Author details
Total words: 8,868
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
34% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 33.9% percentile 2.1% BS Score2 analyzed articles8.9K 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 4.0% 4.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.7% 4.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.0% 6.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.2% 5.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.1% 1.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.8% 1.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.8% 3.8% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% Attempt to Sell a Product… Sitewide 0.5% Author 4.4% 4.4% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.9% 0.9% 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 4.0%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Author 7.3%, sitewide 6.0% In-Group Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.5%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Author 5.7%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.4%, sitewide 3.3% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.2%, sitewide 5.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 4.4%, sitewide 0.5% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst