Author summary
24% 1 analyzed article/video 1,405 analyzed words
BS Summary: These University of Chicago results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Authority , and Optimism Bias , with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 6.4% saturation with 269 hits . Analysis detected 2,555 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,215 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of 27% (4,594 of 6,222 authors). This University of Chicago is better (less manipulative) than 73.80% of the peer group. University of Chicago
Author details
Total words: 4,215
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
26% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 26.2% percentile 1.9% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.2K 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 4.8% 4.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.6% 3.6% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.4% 1.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.5% 4.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 2.6% 2.6% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.7% 0.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.3% 3.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 3.1% 3.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.0% 1.0% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% 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 4.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.6%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 2.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 6.9% Anecdotal: Author 6.4%, sitewide 5.2% Optimism Bias: Author 3.7%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 3.1%, sitewide 5.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 3.6%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 2.2%, sitewide 0.5% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.0% Indoctrination: Author 1.9%, sitewide 0.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 0.5%, sitewide 1.7% Begging the Question: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.5% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst