Author summary
0% 3 analyzed articles/videos 1,591 analyzed words
BS Summary: These MARIA SHERMAN results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Framing Effect , and Appeal to Emotion , with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 21.4% saturation with 1,749 hits . Analysis detected 7,714 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,175 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of 55% (2,865 of 6,278 authors). This MARIA SHERMAN is worse (more manipulative) than 54.40% of the peer group. MARIA SHERMAN
Author details
Total words: 8,175
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
54% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 54.4% percentile 2.8% BS Score3 analyzed articles8.2K 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 7.9% 7.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.4% 3.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 21.4% 21.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 5.0% 5.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.1% 4.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.5% 2.5% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.0% 2.0% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.5% 1.5% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 11.1% 11.1% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.4% 1.4% 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 7.9%, sitewide 26.9% Halo Effect: Author 21.4%, sitewide 6.7% Negativity Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.0%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 11.1%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 3.7% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 4.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.6%, sitewide 3.3% Hindsight Bias: Author 3.4%, sitewide 1.4% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.5% Primacy Effect: Author 2.5%, sitewide 0.9% Bandwagon: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst