Speaker summary
⁠48%2 analyzed articles/videos109 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Africa Center for Strategic Studies results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Framing Effect, and Begging the Question, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 49.2% saturation with 67.905 hits. Analysis detected 402.456 faulty-reasoning hits from 109 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 28.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠46% (15,440 of 28,364 speakers). This Africa Center for Strategic Studies is better (less manipulative) than 54.40% of the peer group.
Africa Center for Strategic Studies
Speaker details
Total words: 109
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

46% percentile
025507510045.6% percentile
28.4% BS Score2 analyzed videos109 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 49.2%49.2%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 34.7%34.7%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 25.1%25.1%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 25.1%25.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 25.1%25.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 25.1%25.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 36.6%36.6%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 9.6%9.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 25.1%25.1%

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 Authority: Speaker 49.2%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 36.6%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 34.7%, sitewide 0.0%Begging the Question: Speaker 25.1%, sitewide 1.7%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 25.1%, sitewide 5.3%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 25.1%, sitewide 7.5%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 25.1%, sitewide 8.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 25.1%, sitewide 19.2%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 9.6%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos