Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 1,216 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Justin Hicks results contain 30 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and In-Group Bias , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 44% saturation with 1,604 hits . Analysis detected 7,122 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,648 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 6.5% and a BS Rank of 90% (726 of 6,629 authors). This Justin Hicks is worse (more manipulative) than 89.10% of the peer group. Justin Hicks
Author details
Total words: 3,648
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
89% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 89.1% percentile 6.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.6K 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% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 44.0% 44.0% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 42.4% 42.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 31.4% 31.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.0% 1.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 13.8% 13.8% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.3% 1.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.1% 4.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 2.2% 2.2% Begging the Question Sitewide 1.7% Author 5.5% 5.5% 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% Negativity Bias: Author 44.0%, sitewide 19.2% Framing Effect: Author 42.4%, sitewide 26.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 31.4%, sitewide 15.9% In-Group Bias: Author 13.8%, sitewide 6.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 7.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 5.2%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 1.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 6.0% Begging the Question: Author 5.5%, sitewide 1.7% Anecdotal: Author 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Ad Hominem: Author 4.5%, sitewide 2.2% Loss Aversion: Author 4.4%, sitewide 2.5% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.0% Hindsight Bias: Author 4.0%, sitewide 1.4% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.7% Slippery Slope: Author 3.5%, sitewide 1.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.1%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.7%, sitewide 1.5% Recency Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst