Author summary
99% 1 analyzed article/video 748 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Mitchell Armentrout results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Negativity Bias , and Optimism Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 11.1% saturation with 248 hits . Analysis detected 2,710 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,244 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.3% and a BS Rank of 78% (1,443 of 6,530 authors). This Mitchell Armentrout is worse (more manipulative) than 77.90% of the peer group. Mitchell Armentrout
Author details
Total words: 2,244
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
78% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 77.9% percentile 4.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.2K 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 11.1% 11.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 9.5% 9.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.5% 2.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.7% 7.7% Recency Bias Sitewide 2.7% Author 7.3% 7.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.5% 4.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 3.6% 3.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 9.4% 9.4% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 10.9% 10.9% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.8% 4.8% 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 11.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 9.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.5%, sitewide 11.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 10.9%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Author 9.4%, sitewide 6.0% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.8%, sitewide 8.1% Recency Bias: Author 7.3%, sitewide 2.7% In-Group Bias: Author 7.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 4.3%, sitewide 6.7% Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 4.0%, sitewide 5.2% Self-Serving Bias: Author 4.6%, sitewide 3.7% Overconfidence Bias: Author 4.1%, sitewide 4.6% Hindsight Bias: Author 4.1%, sitewide 1.4% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.0% Indoctrination: Author 3.6%, sitewide 0.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.1%, sitewide 3.3% False Dilemma: Author 3.1%, sitewide 1.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.9% Circular Reasoning: Author 1.9%, sitewide 0.1% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst