Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,629 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Meg Cunningham results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Framing Effect, and Politically Right Leaning Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 4.9% saturation with 317 hits. Analysis detected 3,342 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,516 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠10% (5,741 of 6,359 authors). This Meg Cunningham is better (less manipulative) than 90.30% of the peer group.
Meg Cunningham
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠10%Meg Cunningham (selected)2%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 6,516
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

10% percentile
02550751009.7% percentile
1.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles6.5K 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 3.9%3.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 2.6%2.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 1.9%1.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 0.4%0.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 4.6%4.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 2.2%2.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 1.1%1.1%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 0.4%0.4%

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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 4.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 2.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.4%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 1.5%, sitewide 5.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 4.9%, sitewide 0.8%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.9%, sitewide 3.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 3.3%, sitewide 1.4%Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Slippery Slope: Author 2.5%, sitewide 1.7%Loss Aversion: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Author 2.1%, sitewide 1.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos