Author summary
90% 2 analyzed articles/videos 1,399 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Special to El Paso Matters results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Confirmation Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 12.3% saturation with 644 hits . Analysis detected 5,901 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,244 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.1% and a BS Rank of 62% (2,385 of 6,197 authors). This Special to El Paso Matters is worse (more manipulative) than 61.50% of the peer group. Special to El Paso Matters
Author details
Total words: 5,244
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
62% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 61.5% percentile 3.1% BS Score2 analyzed articles5.2K 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 12.3% 12.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 4.8% 4.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.5% 2.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 8.0% 8.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 11.8% 11.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.1% 2.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.6% 4.6% Attempt to Sell a Product… Sitewide 0.5% Author 4.8% 4.8% Loss Aversion Sitewide 2.5% Author 6.1% 6.1% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 1.0% 1.0% 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 12.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 4.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 8.0%, sitewide 15.9% Halo Effect: Author 11.8%, sitewide 6.7% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 6.9% Loss Aversion: Author 6.1%, sitewide 2.5% Optimism Bias: Author 3.0%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 5.0%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 2.5%, sitewide 5.2% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 4.8%, sitewide 0.5% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.0% False Dilemma: Author 3.7%, sitewide 1.5% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.9%, sitewide 3.3% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 3.1%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 2.8%, sitewide 1.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Indoctrination: Author 2.6%, sitewide 0.0% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.4%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst