Author summary
76% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,496 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Noah Biesiada results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Self-Serving Bias , and Anchoring Bias , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.3% saturation with 688 hits . Analysis detected 3,659 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,488 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.4% and a BS Rank of 44% (3,565 of 6,359 authors). This Noah Biesiada is better (less manipulative) than 56.10% of the peer group. Noah Biesiada
Author details
Total words: 4,488
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
44% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 43.9% percentile 2.4% BS Score2 analyzed articles4.5K 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 8.1% 8.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.5% 2.5% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.2% 2.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.1% 0.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.1% 0.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.7% 3.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 2.9% 2.9% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.1% 1.1% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.7% 0.7% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% 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 8.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 15.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 2.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 7.5% Self-Serving Bias: Author 7.0%, sitewide 3.7% In-Group Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.1%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.9%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.7%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 4.0%, sitewide 4.0% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 3.9%, sitewide 2.7% Ad Hominem: Author 3.4%, sitewide 2.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.9%, sitewide 3.3% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.5% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 2.2% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.0% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.0% Actor-Observer Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 0.6% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst