Author summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos1,902 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sarah Phillips results contain 16 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Optimism Bias, and Halo Effect, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 8.7% saturation with 462 hits. Analysis detected 1,963 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,330 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠41% (3,768 of 6,363 authors). This Sarah Phillips is better (less manipulative) than 59.20% of the peer group.
Sarah Phillips
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠41%Sarah Phillips (selected)3%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 5,330
Article count: 2
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

41% percentile
025507510040.8% percentile
2.3% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.3K 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 0.8%0.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 1.0%1.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 0.9%0.9%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Author 8.7%8.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 0.6%0.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 0.1%0.1%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 3.3%3.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 0.3%0.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 2.5%2.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 4.9%4.9%

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 0.8%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 0.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 0.6%, sitewide 9.1%Indoctrination: Author 8.7%, sitewide 0.0%Hasty Generalization: Author 7.7%, sitewide 8.1%Halo Effect: Author 3.3%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 4.9%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Author 2.5%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.3%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.2%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.4%Appeal to Nature: Author 0.1%, sitewide 0.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos