Author summary
28% 3 analyzed articles/videos 4,078 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Noah Lanard results contain 44 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Confirmation Bias , and Anecdotal , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 6.7% saturation with 899 hits . Analysis detected 8,694 faulty-reasoning hits from 13,349 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 12% (5,580 of 6,316 authors). This Noah Lanard is better (less manipulative) than 88.30% of the peer group. Noah Lanard
Author details
Total words: 13,349
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
12% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 11.7% percentile 1.5% BS Score3 analyzed articles13.3K 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 3.5% 3.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.6% 3.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 6.7% 6.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.7% 2.7% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.0% 1.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.2% 0.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 3.0% 3.0% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.1% 1.1% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.3% 0.3% 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 3.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 6.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.7%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 6.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 5.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 3.0%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.7%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 4.1%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst