Author summary
0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Sen. Rand Paul results contain 37 faulty reasoning types, including In-Group Bias , Appeal to Emotion , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 24.9% saturation with 929 hits . Analysis detected 6,654 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,736 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 6,299 authors). This Sen. Rand Paul is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Sen. Rand Paul
Author details
Total words: 3,736
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.7K 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 10.9% 10.9% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 11.2% 11.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.8% 1.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 14.3% 14.3% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.5% 0.5% False Dilemma Sitewide 1.5% Author 7.4% 7.4% Status Quo Bias Sitewide 2.2% Author 7.8% 7.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 24.9% 24.9% Politically Right Leaning… Sitewide 1.4% Author 7.0% 7.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.6% 3.6% 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 10.9%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 24.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 13.7%, sitewide 15.9% In-Group Bias: Author 14.3%, sitewide 6.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 12.3%, sitewide 8.1% Indoctrination: Author 11.2%, sitewide 0.0% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.8%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 10.4%, sitewide 5.3% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.6%, sitewide 9.1% Optimism Bias: Author 8.7%, sitewide 6.0% Status Quo Bias: Author 7.8%, sitewide 2.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 7.5% False Dilemma: Author 7.4%, sitewide 1.5% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Author 7.0%, sitewide 1.4% Halo Effect: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.7% Slippery Slope: Author 6.6%, sitewide 1.7% Anecdotal: Author 2.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 3.7% Ad Hominem: Author 3.3%, sitewide 2.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.5%, sitewide 3.3% Begging the Question: Author 3.1%, sitewide 1.7% Unattributed Quote: Author 2.9%, sitewide 1.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst