Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 794 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Katelyn Burns results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Appeal to Emotion , and Pessimism Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 64.8% saturation with 1,543 hits . Analysis detected 7,279 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,383 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 12.7% and a BS Rank of 97% (223 of 6,359 authors). This Katelyn Burns is worse (more manipulative) than 96.50% of the peer group. Katelyn Burns
Author details
Total words: 2,383
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
97% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 96.5% percentile 12.7% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.4K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 64.8% 64.8% Pessimism Bias Sitewide 1.9% Author 35.6% 35.6% Slippery Slope Sitewide 1.7% Author 24.9% 24.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 37.3% 37.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 38.0% 38.0% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Author 15.7% 15.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 15.5% 15.5% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Author 9.4% 9.4% Genetic Fallacy Sitewide 1.4% Author 8.1% 8.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.1% 0.1% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Framing Effect: Author 64.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 38.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 37.3%, sitewide 15.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 35.6%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 24.9%, sitewide 1.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 15.7%, sitewide 3.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 15.5%, sitewide 7.5% Hasty Generalization: Author 11.0%, sitewide 8.1% Anecdotal: Author 9.5%, sitewide 5.2% Ad Hominem: Author 9.4%, sitewide 2.2% Availability Heuristic: Author 5.3%, sitewide 9.1% Genetic Fallacy: Author 8.1%, sitewide 1.4% Optimism Bias: Author 6.9%, sitewide 6.0% In-Group Bias: Author 4.3%, sitewide 6.9% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 4.3%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.2%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.5%, sitewide 1.5% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.3%, sitewide 1.9% Horn Effect: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.0% Begging the Question: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.7% Tu Quoque: Author 1.6%, sitewide 0.2% Circular Reasoning: Author 0.1%, sitewide 0.1% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst