Author summary
â 0% 1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Walid Phares results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias , Hasty Generalization , and Biased Writer Voice , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 22.4% saturation with 362 hits . Analysis detected 3,089 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,616 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of â 0% (0 of 6,629 authors). This Walid Phares is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group. Walid Phares
Author details
Total words: 1,616
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
0% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 0.0% percentile 0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.6K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0â50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 4.6% 4.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 22.0% 22.0% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 18.4% 18.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 3.3% 3.3% Attempt to Sell a Product⌠Sitewide 0.5% Author 13.1% 13.1% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 19.3% 19.3% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Author 8.7% 8.7% Straw Man Sitewide 0.9% Author 9.3% 9.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% False Dilemma Sitewide 1.5% Author 7.1% 7.1% 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 4.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 22.4%, sitewide 19.2% Confirmation Bias: Author 22.0%, sitewide 7.5% Hasty Generalization: Author 19.3%, sitewide 8.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 18.4%, sitewide 5.3% Appeal to Emotion: Author 3.3%, sitewide 15.9% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 13.1%, sitewide 0.5% Appeal to Authority: Author 3.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 10.1%, sitewide 9.1% Straw Man: Author 9.3%, sitewide 0.9% Indoctrination: Author 8.7%, sitewide 0.0% False Dilemma: Author 7.1%, sitewide 1.5% In-Group Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 6.9% Optimism Bias: Author 5.0%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 5.1%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.8%, sitewide 3.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 4.1%, sitewide 4.6% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 4.2%, sitewide 0.8% Anchoring Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 3.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.1% Begging the Question: Author 3.0%, sitewide 1.7% Primacy Effect: Author 3.0%, sitewide 0.9% Recency Bias: Author 0.1%, sitewide 2.7% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst