Author summary
69% 1 analyzed article/video 1,029 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Zara Stone results contain 32 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Appeal to Emotion , and Anecdotal , with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 12.1% saturation with 373 hits . Analysis detected 3,041 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,087 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.1% and a BS Rank of 62% (2,562 of 6,628 authors). This Zara Stone is worse (more manipulative) than 61.40% of the peer group. Zara Stone
Author details
Total words: 3,087
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
61% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 61.4% percentile 3.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.1K 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 12.1% 12.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 6.8% 6.8% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 9.5% 9.5% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Author 0.8% 0.8% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 10.8% 10.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 2.2% 2.2% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 4.9% 4.9% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.5% 0.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 4.1% 4.1% 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 12.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 6.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 9.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 1.2%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Author 10.8%, sitewide 5.3% Availability Heuristic: Author 4.9%, sitewide 9.1% Anecdotal: Author 8.2%, sitewide 5.2% Hasty Generalization: Author 5.5%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 4.1%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Author 0.8%, sitewide 6.7% Self-Serving Bias: Author 6.2%, sitewide 3.7% Optimism Bias: Author 3.1%, sitewide 6.0% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 4.2%, sitewide 3.3% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 4.0% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 3.6%, sitewide 0.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 0.5%, sitewide 2.2% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.9% Slippery Slope: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.7% Begging the Question: Author 1.1%, sitewide 1.7% False Dilemma: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.4%, sitewide 0.8% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst