Author summary
0% 2 analyzed articles/videos
BS Summary: These Sarah Todd results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Biased Writer Voice , with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 8.9% saturation with 274 hits . Analysis detected 2,822 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,090 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,358 authors). This Sarah Todd is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Sarah Todd
Author details
Total words: 3,090
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.1K 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% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 7.3% 7.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 2.8% 2.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 8.7% 8.7% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.3% 0.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 6.2% 6.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 6.5% 6.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.9% 4.9% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.8% 3.8% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.6% 0.6% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% 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 7.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 8.7%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 2.8%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 6.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.9%, sitewide 9.1% Optimism Bias: Author 8.9%, sitewide 6.0% Hasty Generalization: Author 7.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.8%, sitewide 7.5% Biased Writer Voice: Author 7.3%, sitewide 5.3% Halo Effect: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.7% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 6.2%, sitewide 0.8% Anecdotal: Author 2.6%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Bandwagon: Author 2.9%, sitewide 2.2% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 2.2% Loss Aversion: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.5% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.9% False Dilemma: Author 1.8%, sitewide 1.5% Composition/Division: Author 1.8%, sitewide 0.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst