Author summary
19% 1 analyzed article/video 5,806 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Paul Starr results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization , Post Hoc (False Cause) , and Optimism Bias , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 4.9% saturation with 847 hits . Analysis detected 7,946 faulty-reasoning hits from 17,418 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.1% and a BS Rank of 3% (5,983 of 6,170 authors). This Paul Starr is better (less manipulative) than 97.00% of the peer group. Paul Starr
Author details
Total words: 17,418
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
3% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 3.0% percentile 1.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles17.4K 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 2.0% 2.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.2% 1.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.9% 4.9% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.8% 2.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.4% 1.4% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.3% 0.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.6% 0.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.1% 2.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.7% 3.7% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 1.3% 1.3% 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 2.0%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.4%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.7%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.3%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.3%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 1.9% Recency Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst