Author summary
⁠0%2 analyzed articles/videos941 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Teo Armus results contain 39 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Politically Left Leaning Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 12.3% saturation with 464 hits. Analysis detected 3,174 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,764 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠36% (4,019 of 6,244 authors). This Teo Armus is better (less manipulative) than 64.40% of the peer group.
Teo Armus
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠36%Teo Armus (selected)3%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 3,764
Article count: 2
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

36% percentile
025507510035.6% percentile
2.2% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 12.3%12.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 5.7%5.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.0%2.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.3%2.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.8%1.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 10.3%10.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 1.1%1.1%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Author 7.6%7.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 0.3%0.3%

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 12.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 5.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 10.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.0%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.3%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 0.5%, sitewide 8.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 7.6%, sitewide 2.0%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 5.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 1.1%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 5.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 4.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 0.3%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.5%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.3%Pessimism Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos