Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video1,378 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Philip Pilkington results contain 43 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Ad Hominem, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 37.4% saturation with 2,061 hits. Analysis detected 10,561 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,512 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠80% (1,333 of 6,361 authors). This Philip Pilkington is worse (more manipulative) than 79.10% of the peer group.
Philip Pilkington
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠80%Philip Pilkington (selected)5%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 5,512
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

79% percentile
025507510079.1% percentile
4.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.5K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 37.4%37.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 4.3%4.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 4.8%4.8%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Author 11.4%11.4%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Author 11.8%11.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 17.1%17.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 11.3%11.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 15.8%15.8%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Author 7.2%7.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 4.0%4.0%

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%Biased Writer Voice: Author 37.4%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Author 4.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 11.3%, sitewide 19.2%Confirmation Bias: Author 17.1%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.8%, sitewide 15.9%Hasty Generalization: Author 15.8%, sitewide 8.1%Ad Hominem: Author 11.8%, sitewide 2.2%Burden of Proof: Author 11.4%, sitewide 0.4%Appeal to Authority: Author 4.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 6.5%, sitewide 9.1%Indoctrination: Author 7.2%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 1.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 5.8%, sitewide 3.3%Overconfidence Bias: Author 5.4%, sitewide 4.6%Anecdotal: Author 2.7%, sitewide 5.2%Pessimism Bias: Author 5.2%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Author 4.9%, sitewide 1.7%Horn Effect: Author 4.3%, sitewide 1.0%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 3.5%, sitewide 2.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 3.1%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos