Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Luke Miller results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause) , Indoctrination , and Optimism Bias , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 12.7% saturation with 268 hits . Analysis detected 1,498 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,115 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,261 authors). This Luke Miller is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Luke Miller
Author details
Total words: 2,115
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.1K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–25%
0.0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.4% 2.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.1% 3.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.5% 1.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 6.3% 6.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.4% 1.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.2% 2.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 12.7% 12.7% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 6.5% 6.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 5.2% 5.2% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 5% 5% 10% 10% 15% 15% 20% 20% 25% 25% Negativity Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 12.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.2%, sitewide 6.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 6.5%, sitewide 3.3% Indoctrination: Author 6.3%, sitewide 0.0% Optimism Bias: Author 6.0%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.7%, sitewide 5.2% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.5% Ad Hominem: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% False Dilemma: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.5% Circular Reasoning: Author 1.8%, sitewide 0.1% Begging the Question: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.7% Straw Man: Author 1.6%, sitewide 0.9% Hindsight Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.4% Unattributed Quote: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.1% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 0.8%, sitewide 0.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst