Author summary
0% 2 analyzed articles/videos
BS Summary: These Naomi Sui Pang results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Hasty Generalization , and Biased Writer Voice , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 6.5% saturation with 273 hits . Analysis detected 2,317 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,224 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,172 authors). This Naomi Sui Pang is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Naomi Sui Pang
Author details
Total words: 4,224
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.2K 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 2.3% 2.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.1% 2.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 5.1% 5.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.1% 1.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.4% 1.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 4.3% 4.3% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 1.7% 1.7% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 3.7% 3.7% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 4.1% 4.1% 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 2.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 4.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 4.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.7%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.2%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.7%, sitewide 5.2% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.9% Unattributed Quote: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.8%, sitewide 0.8% Begging the Question: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst