Author summary
21%1 analyzed article/video938 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Annie Sciacca results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Hasty Generalization, and Appeal to Authority, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 5.9% saturation with 223 hits. Analysis detected 1,378 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,752 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 21% (6,796 of 8,520 authors). This Annie Sciacca is better (less manipulative) than 79.80% of the peer group.
Annie Sciacca
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Hannah Martin1%
0%Paul DeMark1%
0%Emma Sedlak1%
0%Michael Fox1%
0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
21%Annie Sciacca (selected)2%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 3,752
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

20% percentile
025507510020.2% percentile
1.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.8K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 1.4%1.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 0.8%0.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 3.4%3.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 1.8%1.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 2.0%2.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Author 1.5%1.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 3.1%3.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 1.2%1.2%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 1.0%1.0%

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 1.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 3.4%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 3.1%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 2.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Author 5.9%, sitewide 5.2%Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.0%, sitewide 5.3%Anchoring Bias: Author 1.0%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.5%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 1.1%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 0.6%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Author 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.5%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 1.9%Hindsight Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos