Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video154 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tan Vinh results contain 19 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Framing Effect, and In-Group Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 60.2% saturation with 278 hits. Analysis detected 1,680 faulty-reasoning hits from 462 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 19.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠99% (83 of 6,387 authors). This Tan Vinh is worse (more manipulative) than 98.70% of the peer group.
Tan Vinh
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠99%Tan Vinh (selected)20%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 462
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

99% percentile
025507510098.7% percentile
19.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles462 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 60.2%60.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 52.2%52.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 39.4%39.4%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Author 30.1%30.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 47.2%47.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 20.8%20.8%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Author 12.1%12.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 24.0%24.0%Genetic FallacySitewide 1.4%Author 9.1%9.1%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Author 9.5%9.5%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Author 60.2%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Author 52.2%, sitewide 6.7%Framing Effect: Author 47.2%, sitewide 26.9%In-Group Bias: Author 39.4%, sitewide 6.9%Anchoring Bias: Author 30.1%, sitewide 4.0%Appeal to Emotion: Author 24.0%, sitewide 15.9%Optimism Bias: Author 20.8%, sitewide 6.0%Bandwagon: Author 12.1%, sitewide 2.2%Hasty Generalization: Author 11.3%, sitewide 8.1%Overconfidence Bias: Author 11.3%, sitewide 4.6%Loss Aversion: Author 9.5%, sitewide 2.5%Genetic Fallacy: Author 9.1%, sitewide 1.4%Availability Heuristic: Author 6.7%, sitewide 9.1%Anecdotal: Author 6.7%, sitewide 5.2%Primacy Effect: Author 5.6%, sitewide 0.9%Recency Bias: Author 5.4%, sitewide 2.7%Begging the Question: Author 4.8%, sitewide 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.8%, sitewide 3.3%Status Quo Bias: Author 2.6%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos