Speaker summary
⁠100%2 analyzed articles/videos90 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Aaron Rosenthal results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 66.7% saturation with 90 hits. Analysis detected 416.875 faulty-reasoning hits from 90 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 44.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠61% (10,826 of 27,710 speakers). This Aaron Rosenthal is worse (more manipulative) than 60.90% of the peer group.
Aaron Rosenthal
Speaker details
Total words: 90
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

61% percentile
025507510060.9% percentile
44.1% BS Score2 analyzed videos90 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 66.7%66.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 61.1%61.1%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 41.7%41.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 33.3%33.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 66.7%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 61.1%, sitewide 26.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 41.7%, sitewide 11.1%Loss Aversion: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 2.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 19.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 2.0%Slippery Slope: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos