Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Paul Cassell results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Overconfidence Bias , and Anecdotal , with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 861 hits . Analysis detected 6,385 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,699 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,628 authors). This Paul Cassell is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Paul Cassell
Author details
Total words: 9,699
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles9.7K 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 0.8% 0.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.7% 2.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.0% 1.0% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.7% 0.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.0% 3.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.3% 5.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 2.2% 2.2% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.8% 1.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.5% 3.5% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 0.4% 0.4% 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 0.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.0%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 8.9%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 2.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.9%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 3.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 4.3%, sitewide 4.6% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.8%, sitewide 3.3% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.5% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.9% Bandwagon: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.2% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst