Author summary
80% 1 analyzed article/video 703 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ludovico Saint Amour di Chanaz Ph.D. results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause) , Indoctrination , and Confirmation Bias , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 19.6% saturation with 827 hits . Analysis detected 5,389 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,218 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4% and a BS Rank of 75% (1,610 of 6,394 authors). This Ludovico Saint Amour di Chanaz Ph.D. is worse (more manipulative) than 74.80% of the peer group. Ludovico Saint Amour di Chanaz Ph.D.
Author details
Total words: 4,218
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
75% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 74.8% percentile 4.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.2K 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 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.1% 2.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 5.9% 5.9% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 15.8% 15.8% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 19.6% 19.6% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 9.6% 9.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.9% 1.9% Appeal to Nature Sitewide 0.2% Author 5.5% 5.5% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.6% 0.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 7.2% 7.2% 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 1.2%, sitewide 26.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 19.6%, sitewide 8.1% Negativity Bias: Author 5.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.1%, sitewide 15.9% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 15.8%, sitewide 3.3% Appeal to Authority: Author 7.2%, sitewide 11.1% Indoctrination: Author 9.6%, sitewide 0.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 8.8%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Author 7.6%, sitewide 6.0% Appeal to Nature: Author 5.5%, sitewide 0.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.0%, sitewide 5.3% Recency Bias: Author 5.3%, sitewide 2.7% Anecdotal: Author 0.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 4.4%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.6%, sitewide 0.8% False Dilemma: Author 3.5%, sitewide 1.5% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 3.1% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 3.0%, sitewide 1.9% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.9% Unattributed Quote: Author 2.1%, sitewide 1.1% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst