Author summary
0% 3 analyzed articles/videos 189 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Zahara Hill results contain 14 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Appeal to Authority , and In-Group Bias , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 84.8% saturation with 385 hits . Analysis detected 1,834 faulty-reasoning hits from 454 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 28.9% and a BS Rank of 100% (22 of 6,628 authors). This Zahara Hill is worse (more manipulative) than 99.70% of the peer group. Zahara Hill
Author details
Total words: 454
Article count: 3
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
100% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 99.7% percentile 28.9% BS Score3 analyzed articles454 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–100%
0.0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 84.8% 84.8% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 70.3% 70.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 47.1% 47.1% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 48.7% 48.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 44.7% 44.7% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Author 30.4% 30.4% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 17.4% 17.4% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 18.7% 18.7% Status Quo Bias Sitewide 2.2% Author 10.3% 10.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.3% 1.3% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% 80% 80% 100% 100% Framing Effect: Author 84.8%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 70.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Authority: Author 48.7%, sitewide 11.1% In-Group Bias: Author 47.1%, sitewide 6.9% Appeal to Emotion: Author 44.7%, sitewide 15.9% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 30.4%, sitewide 3.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 18.7%, sitewide 9.1% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 17.4%, sitewide 0.8% Halo Effect: Author 11.9%, sitewide 6.7% Status Quo Bias: Author 10.3%, sitewide 2.2% Recency Bias: Author 8.4%, sitewide 2.7% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 7.5% Blind-Spot Bias: Author 6.0%, sitewide 0.2% Anecdotal: Author 4.0%, sitewide 5.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst