Author summary
76% 2 analyzed articles/videos 904 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Naomi Lim results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Negativity Bias , and Framing Effect , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 11.2% saturation with 714 hits . Analysis detected 7,141 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,352 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.8% and a BS Rank of 55% (2,807 of 6,227 authors). This Naomi Lim is worse (more manipulative) than 54.90% of the peer group. Naomi Lim
Author details
Total words: 6,352
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
55% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 54.9% percentile 2.8% BS Score2 analyzed articles6.4K 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 8.5% 8.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 8.9% 8.9% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.0% 2.0% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Author 7.8% 7.8% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.9% 1.9% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.4% 0.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 11.2% 11.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.4% 4.4% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.9% 1.9% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.7% 0.7% 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 8.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 8.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 11.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 8.9%, sitewide 8.1% Ad Hominem: Author 7.8%, sitewide 2.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 6.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 1.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 4.6% False Dilemma: Author 4.3%, sitewide 1.5% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.7% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 2.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.3%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Indoctrination: Author 2.7%, sitewide 0.0% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.4% Bandwagon: Author 1.5%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst