Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 381 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Rachel Martin results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Biased Writer Voice , and Availability Heuristic , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 54.5% saturation with 623 hits . Analysis detected 3,724 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,143 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 12.5% and a BS Rank of 97% (227 of 6,359 authors). This Rachel Martin is worse (more manipulative) than 96.40% of the peer group. Rachel Martin
Author details
Total words: 1,143
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
96% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 96.4% percentile 12.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.1K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–75%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 54.5% 54.5% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 33.3% 33.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 43.9% 43.9% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 33.0% 33.0% Genetic Fallacy Sitewide 1.4% Author 20.6% 20.6% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 18.4% 18.4% Burden of Proof Sitewide 0.4% Author 12.4% 12.4% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 15.8% 15.8% Horn Effect Sitewide 1.0% Author 11.2% 11.2% Actor-Observer Bias Sitewide 0.6% Author 10.6% 10.6% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% Negativity Bias: Author 54.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 43.9%, sitewide 15.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 33.3%, sitewide 5.3% Availability Heuristic: Author 33.0%, sitewide 9.1% Framing Effect: Author 15.8%, sitewide 26.9% Genetic Fallacy: Author 20.6%, sitewide 1.4% Self-Serving Bias: Author 18.4%, sitewide 3.7% Burden of Proof: Author 12.4%, sitewide 0.4% Anecdotal: Author 11.5%, sitewide 5.2% Horn Effect: Author 11.2%, sitewide 1.0% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.0%, sitewide 11.1% Actor-Observer Bias: Author 10.6%, sitewide 0.6% Hasty Generalization: Author 10.3%, sitewide 8.1% Anchoring Bias: Author 8.0%, sitewide 4.0% Confirmation Bias: Author 7.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.4%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 6.0% Ad Hominem: Author 5.3%, sitewide 2.2% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 5.2%, sitewide 2.7% Overconfidence Bias: Author 4.2%, sitewide 4.6% Blind-Spot Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 0.2% False Dilemma: Author 2.5%, sitewide 1.5% Special Pleading: Author 2.5%, sitewide 0.3% Bandwagon: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst