Author summary
95% 2 analyzed articles/videos 851 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Liz Napolitano results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Appeal to Authority , and Anchoring Bias , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 32.4% saturation with 1,215 hits . Analysis detected 5,089 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,745 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.7% and a BS Rank of 82% (1,248 of 6,628 authors). This Liz Napolitano is worse (more manipulative) than 81.20% of the peer group. Liz Napolitano
Author details
Total words: 3,745
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
81% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 81.2% percentile 4.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.7K 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% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 32.4% 32.4% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 1.5% 1.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.7% 3.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.1% 1.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 18.2% 18.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.4% 2.4% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 5.3% 5.3% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 7.5% 7.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.0% 4.0% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 7.9% 7.9% 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% Optimism Bias: Author 32.4%, sitewide 6.0% Framing Effect: Author 1.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 19.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 18.2%, sitewide 7.5% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 8.9%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.0%, sitewide 8.1% Anchoring Bias: Author 7.9%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 7.5%, sitewide 3.3% Halo Effect: Author 6.3%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.8%, sitewide 5.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 5.3%, sitewide 0.8% Anecdotal: Author 2.0%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 4.6% Status Quo Bias: Author 4.1%, sitewide 2.2% Recency Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 2.7% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 3.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 1.9% Bandwagon: Author 3.0%, sitewide 2.2% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 2.0%, sitewide 2.5% Middle Ground: Author 2.2%, sitewide 0.1% Begging the Question: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.7% Optimism Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst