Author summary
0% 2 analyzed articles/videos 3,552 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Nicholas David results contain 45 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Appeal to Emotion , with Ad Hominem as the most egregious example at 6.8% saturation with 969 hits . Analysis detected 10,224 faulty-reasoning hits from 14,208 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.6% and a BS Rank of 16% (5,278 of 6,262 authors). This Nicholas David is better (less manipulative) than 84.30% of the peer group. Nicholas David
Author details
Total words: 14,208
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
16% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 15.7% percentile 1.6% BS Score2 analyzed articles14.2K 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 2.9% 2.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 6.1% 6.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 4.2% 4.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.0% 2.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.6% 0.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.6% 2.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.1% 2.1% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.4% 1.4% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Author 6.8% 6.8% 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 2.9%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 6.1%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 6.9% Ad Hominem: Author 6.8%, sitewide 2.2% Halo Effect: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 3.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.8%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.5% Straw Man: Author 2.3%, sitewide 0.9% Bandwagon: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.2% False Dilemma: Author 2.2%, sitewide 1.5% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst