Author summary
⁠54%1 analyzed article/video534 analyzed words
BS Summary: These RIO YAMAT results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Self-Serving Bias, and Politically Right Leaning Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 6% saturation with 128 hits. Analysis detected 1,470 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,136 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠46% (3,437 of 6,358 authors). This RIO YAMAT is better (less manipulative) than 54.10% of the peer group.
RIO YAMAT
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠46%RIO YAMAT (selected)3%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 2,136
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

46% percentile
025507510045.9% percentile
2.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.1K 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 1.5%1.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 2.5%2.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 5.1%5.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 1.6%1.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 3.2%3.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 6.0%6.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 2.8%2.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 1.5%1.5%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 2.6%2.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 2.9%2.9%

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 1.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 6.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 3.2%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 1.6%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 2.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 2.9%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.2%, sitewide 5.3%Self-Serving Bias: Author 4.6%, sitewide 3.7%Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.0%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Author 4.0%, sitewide 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Recency Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 2.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 2.7%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2%Genetic Fallacy: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos