Author summary
5% 1 analyzed article/video 2,251 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Paul Monies results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Appeal to Authority , and Appeal to Emotion , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 2.9% saturation with 258 hits . Analysis detected 1,852 faulty-reasoning hits from 9,004 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0.6% and a BS Rank of 1% (8,222 of 8,290 authors). This Paul Monies is better (less manipulative) than 99.20% of the peer group. Paul Monies
Author details
Total words: 9,004
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
1% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.8% percentile 0.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles9K 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 1.1% 1.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 2.9% 2.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.3% 1.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.8% 1.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 0.2% 0.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.2% 0.2% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.7% 0.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.0% 2.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.6% 0.6% 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 1.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.3%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 0.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 0.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.7%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% False Dilemma: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.5% Hindsight Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 1.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst