Author summary
⁠7%1 analyzed article/video2,147 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Phillip Vance Smith II results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Negativity Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 4.1% saturation with 261 hits. Analysis detected 2,380 faulty-reasoning hits from 6,441 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (6,358 of 6,628 authors). This Phillip Vance Smith II is better (less manipulative) than 95.90% of the peer group.
Phillip Vance Smith II
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Jacob Owens1%
⁠1%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠5%Phillip Vance Smith II (selected)2%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 6,441
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

4% percentile
02550751004.1% percentile
1.2% BS Score1 analyzed articles6.4K 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 3.9%3.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 3.7%3.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.6%1.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 0.7%0.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 0.9%0.9%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 0.3%0.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.4%1.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 4.0%4.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 1.2%1.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 1.6%1.6%

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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.6%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 0.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 4.0%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 0.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.8%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.0%Pessimism Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.7%Begging the Question: Author 0.2%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos