Author summary
14%6 analyzed articles/videos5,930 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Madison Czopek results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 7% saturation with 1,721 hits. Analysis detected 12,134 faulty-reasoning hits from 24,714 analyzed words across 6 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.1% and a BS Rank of 4% (6,127 of 6,323 authors). This Madison Czopek is better (less manipulative) than 96.90% of the peer group.
Madison Czopek
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Megan Fan Munce1%
1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
4%Madison Czopek (selected)2%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 24,714
Article count: 6
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

3% percentile
02550751003.1% percentile
1.1% BS Score6 analyzed articles24.7K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 2.7%2.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.4%1.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 6.4%6.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.2%0.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.5%2.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.1%1.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 1.0%1.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 3.3%3.3%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 1.4%1.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 7.0%7.0%

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 2.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 6.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 7.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 3.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.1%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate