Author summary
⁠0%4 analyzed articles/videos2,853 analyzed words
BS Summary: These THOMAS ADAMSON results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.3% saturation with 1,318 hits. Analysis detected 9,288 faulty-reasoning hits from 15,908 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠9% (5,813 of 6,359 authors). This THOMAS ADAMSON is better (less manipulative) than 91.40% of the peer group.
THOMAS ADAMSON
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Vivek Chibber1%
⁠0%Sneha Dey1%
⁠0%Ideastream Public Media1%
⁠0%Megan Fan Munce1%
⁠1%Los Angeles Times staff1%
⁠9%THOMAS ADAMSON (selected)2%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 15,908
Article count: 4
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

9% percentile
02550751008.6% percentile
1.4% BS Score4 analyzed articles15.9K 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 5.1%5.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 4.3%4.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 8.3%8.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.9%2.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 0.5%0.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 2.8%2.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 1.5%1.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Author 0.7%0.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 4.3%4.3%

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 5.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 8.3%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 4.3%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 2.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 4.3%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Author 3.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Author 2.0%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 2.4%, sitewide 0.8%Bandwagon: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos