Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 2,234 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sam Lubell results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Negativity Bias , and Halo Effect , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 21% saturation with 1,878 hits . Analysis detected 10,129 faulty-reasoning hits from 8,936 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.9% and a BS Rank of 58% (2,796 of 6,628 authors). This Sam Lubell is worse (more manipulative) than 57.80% of the peer group. Sam Lubell
Author details
Total words: 8,936
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
58% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 57.8% percentile 2.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles8.9K 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% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 21.0% 21.0% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 13.5% 13.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 5.0% 5.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 8.6% 8.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.0% 4.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.2% 2.2% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.2% 0.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.9% 2.9% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.9% 0.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 3.9% 3.9% 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 13.5%, sitewide 26.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 21.0%, sitewide 5.3% Negativity Bias: Author 8.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.0%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.0%, sitewide 8.1% Halo Effect: Author 8.1%, sitewide 6.7% Anecdotal: Author 8.0%, sitewide 5.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 6.2%, sitewide 6.0% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.9%, sitewide 0.8% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 3.7% Recency Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 2.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.7% Unattributed Quote: Author 2.7%, sitewide 1.1% Loss Aversion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.5% Indoctrination: Author 2.3%, sitewide 0.0% Bandwagon: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst