Author summary
14% 1 analyzed article/video 1,140 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Nick Hardinges results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Framing Effect , and Negativity Bias , with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 6.1% saturation with 277 hits . Analysis detected 1,781 faulty-reasoning hits from 4,560 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 25% (7,034 of 9,265 authors). This Nick Hardinges is better (less manipulative) than 75.90% of the peer group. Nick Hardinges
Author details
Total words: 4,560
Article count: 1
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
24% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 24.1% percentile 1.5% BS Score1 analyzed articles4.6K 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 3.9% 3.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 3.9% 3.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 1.8% 1.8% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.2% 1.2% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 4.2% 4.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 1.3% 1.3% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Author 0.6% 0.6% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.6% 1.6% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.2% 0.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Author 6.1% 6.1% 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 3.9%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 1.8%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Author 4.2%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.2%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 1.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.6%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Author 0.6%, sitewide 6.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 6.1%, sitewide 0.8% Optimism Bias: Author 0.2%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Author 1.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.3%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Recency Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Bandwagon: Author 1.4%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Author 0.8%, sitewide 1.7% Tu Quoque: Author 1.4%, sitewide 0.2% Unattributed Quote: Author 0.7%, sitewide 1.1% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.0% Straw Man: Author 0.5%, sitewide 0.9% Primacy Effect: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst