Author summary
11% 5 analyzed articles/videos 2,035 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Natalie Orenstein results contain 44 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Framing Effect , and Self-Serving Bias , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 6.4% saturation with 816 hits . Analysis detected 6,925 faulty-reasoning hits from 12,745 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.2% and a BS Rank of 5% (5,908 of 6,192 authors). This Natalie Orenstein is better (less manipulative) than 95.40% of the peer group. Natalie Orenstein
Author details
Total words: 12,745
Article count: 5
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
5% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 4.6% percentile 1.2% BS Score5 analyzed articles12.7K 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 3.6% 3.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.4% 2.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 6.4% 6.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.5% 4.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.6% 2.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.4% 0.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.9% 1.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.6% 1.6% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.1% 0.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.7% 2.7% 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 3.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 6.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.7%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.5%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.6%, sitewide 0.8% Loss Aversion: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst