Author summary
12% 5 analyzed articles/videos 2,531 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Michael Tanenbaum results contain 35 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Appeal to Authority , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.8% saturation with 789 hits . Analysis detected 5,021 faulty-reasoning hits from 10,068 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of 10% (5,637 of 6,244 authors). This Michael Tanenbaum is better (less manipulative) than 90.30% of the peer group. Michael Tanenbaum
Author details
Total words: 10,068
Article count: 5
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
10% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 9.7% percentile 1.4% BS Score5 analyzed articles10.1K 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 3.7% 3.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 7.8% 7.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.3% 7.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.7% 1.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 0.9% 0.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.3% 0.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.9% 4.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.0% 2.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.6% 0.6% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.1% 1.1% 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 3.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 7.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.9%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 0.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.0%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.1%, sitewide 5.2% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.0%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Indoctrination: Author 2.4%, sitewide 0.0% Bandwagon: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 0.1%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst