Author summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video
BS Summary: These Sarah Kinbar results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Anchoring Bias as the most egregious example at 4.4% saturation with 55 hits. Analysis detected 212 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,250 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 9,212 authors). This Sarah Kinbar is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the peer group.
Sarah Kinbar
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠100%Bannon's WarRoom39%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
⁠0%Sarah Kinbar (selected)0%
Author details
Total words: 1,250
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

0% percentile
02550751000.0% percentile
0.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.3K 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 4.2%4.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 2.7%2.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Author 2.1%2.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Author 1.8%1.8%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 1.8%1.8%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Author 4.4%4.4%

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 4.2%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Author 2.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 1.8%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Author 1.8%, sitewide 8.1%Anchoring Bias: Author 4.4%, sitewide 4.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos