Author summary
86% 2 analyzed articles/videos 378 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Stavroula Pabst results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.8% saturation with 351 hits . Analysis detected 2,518 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,252 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.7% and a BS Rank of 60% (3,335 of 8,291 authors). This Stavroula Pabst is worse (more manipulative) than 59.80% of the peer group. Stavroula Pabst
Author details
Total words: 3,252
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
60% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 59.8% percentile 2.7% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.3K 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 7.4% 7.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 0.5% 0.5% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.8% 10.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.8% 3.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.9% 1.9% Anecdotal Sitewide 5.2% Author 0.4% 0.4% Quote-first Misdirection Sitewide 0.0% Author 3.8% 3.8% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 1.7% 1.7% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.5% 0.5% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 2.3% 2.3% 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 7.4%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 10.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 0.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.8%, sitewide 11.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 9.8%, sitewide 7.5% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 8.0%, sitewide 8.1% Optimism Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.7%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 0.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 3.8%, sitewide 0.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 2.7% False Dilemma: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.5% Hindsight Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 1.4% Indoctrination: Author 2.3%, sitewide 0.0% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.9% Pessimism Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst