Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video 1,016 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Scott Francis results contain 28 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Post Hoc (False Cause) , and Indoctrination , with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 16.1% saturation with 655 hits . Analysis detected 4,147 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,064 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.6% and a BS Rank of 71% (1,947 of 6,628 authors). This Scott Francis is worse (more manipulative) than 70.60% of the peer group. Scott Francis
Author details
Total words: 4,064
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
71% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 70.6% percentile 3.6% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.1K 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 6.2% 6.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 4.5% 4.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.2% 10.2% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 16.1% 16.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.3% 4.3% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 6.5% 6.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.4% 0.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.0% 3.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 1.5% 1.5% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% Author 8.3% 8.3% 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 6.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 10.2%, sitewide 19.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 16.1%, sitewide 7.5% Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.3%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.0%, sitewide 9.1% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 8.3%, sitewide 3.3% Hasty Generalization: Author 6.3%, sitewide 8.1% In-Group Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.7% Indoctrination: Author 6.5%, sitewide 0.0% Optimism Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 5.6%, sitewide 5.2% Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.9%, sitewide 5.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 3.7% Begging the Question: Author 3.0%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.5% Recency Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.4%, sitewide 0.8% Status Quo Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst