Author summary
0%1 analyzed article/video584 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Pedro Camacho results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Hasty Generalization, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 15.2% saturation with 356 hits. Analysis detected 2,346 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,336 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4% and a BS Rank of 76% (1,637 of 6,628 authors). This Pedro Camacho is worse (more manipulative) than 75.30% of the peer group.
Pedro Camacho
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Jacob Owens1%
1%Megan Fan Munce1%
76%Pedro Camacho (selected)5%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 2,336
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

75% percentile
025507510075.3% percentile
4.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.3K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 7.1%7.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 4.7%4.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 14.5%14.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 2.7%2.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 6.6%6.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 15.2%15.2%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Author 3.9%3.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 1.7%1.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 6.4%6.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 5.6%5.6%

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 7.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 15.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.7%, sitewide 15.9%Anecdotal: Author 14.5%, sitewide 5.2%Appeal to Authority: Author 6.6%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 6.4%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 7.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 7.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.6%, sitewide 3.3%Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 4.0%Quote-first Misdirection: Author 3.9%, sitewide 0.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 3.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.8%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.7%Middle Ground: Author 1.6%, sitewide 0.1%Unattributed Quote: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.1%False Dilemma: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.5%Primacy Effect: Author 1.5%, sitewide 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.8%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos