Author summary
82% 1 analyzed article/video 1,238 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Phillip Inman results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Hasty Generalization , and Biased Writer Voice , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 18.3% saturation with 679 hits . Analysis detected 3,798 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,714 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.3% and a BS Rank of 65% (2,200 of 6,244 authors). This Phillip Inman is worse (more manipulative) than 64.80% of the peer group. Phillip Inman
Author details
Total words: 3,714
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
65% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 64.8% percentile 3.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 12.7% 12.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.7% 2.7% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 0.5% 0.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.5% 1.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.0% 1.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 5.6% 5.6% Pessimism Bias Sitewide 1.9% Author 6.5% 6.5% Attempt to Sell a Product… Sitewide 0.5% Author 4.6% 4.6% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.0% 1.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 3.3% 3.3% 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 12.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 18.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.7%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 5.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 0.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 8.8%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% Biased Writer Voice: Author 6.8%, sitewide 5.3% Halo Effect: Author 1.0%, sitewide 6.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 1.9% Optimism Bias: Author 3.3%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 3.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 4.6%, sitewide 0.5% Loss Aversion: Author 4.5%, sitewide 2.5% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.2%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Begging the Question: Author 2.7%, sitewide 1.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.9% Unattributed Quote: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.1% Slippery Slope: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.7% Burden of Proof: Author 1.6%, sitewide 0.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst