Author summary
78% 3 analyzed articles/videos 1,793 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tran Chau results contain 40 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Self-Serving Bias , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 9.5% saturation with 685 hits . Analysis detected 6,097 faulty-reasoning hits from 7,212 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.1% and a BS Rank of 35% (4,333 of 6,628 authors). This Tran Chau is better (less manipulative) than 65.40% of the peer group. Tran Chau
Author details
Total words: 7,212
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
35% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 34.6% percentile 2.1% BS Score3 analyzed articles7.2K 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 5.9% 5.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 9.5% 9.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 7.9% 7.9% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.5% 3.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.8% 0.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 1.2% 1.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 3.5% 3.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 2.2% 2.2% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Author 6.5% 6.5% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.9% 1.9% 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 5.9%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 9.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 7.9%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 3.5%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.8%, sitewide 6.7% Self-Serving Bias: Author 6.5%, sitewide 3.7% Optimism Bias: Author 5.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 2.8%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 3.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.9%, sitewide 4.6% False Dilemma: Author 3.3%, sitewide 1.5% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.4%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.5% Status Quo Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Author 1.0%, sitewide 2.2% Indoctrination: Author 2.1%, sitewide 0.0% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.0% Burden of Proof: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.4% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst