Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 1,253 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Peter Gietl results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Appeal to Emotion , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 16.7% saturation with 836 hits . Analysis detected 4,536 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,012 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of 58% (2,668 of 6,321 authors). This Peter Gietl is worse (more manipulative) than 57.80% of the peer group. Peter Gietl
Author details
Total words: 5,012
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
58% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 57.8% percentile 2.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles5K 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 2.7% 2.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 0.5% 0.5% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 16.7% 16.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.7% 1.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.2% 7.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.5% 1.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.5% 1.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 5.8% 5.8% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 2.4% 2.4% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.5% 0.5% 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 2.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 19.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 16.7%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.2%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.7%, sitewide 11.1% In-Group Bias: Author 10.2%, sitewide 6.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 10.0%, sitewide 8.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.5%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 6.0%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 6.0% Indoctrination: Author 5.8%, sitewide 0.0% Overconfidence Bias: Author 5.7%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 1.4% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Author 2.2%, sitewide 1.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% False Dilemma: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.5% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst