Speaker summary
⁠100%1 analyzed article/video37 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Alvarado-Barnes results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Pessimism Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 37 hits. Analysis detected 148 faulty-reasoning hits from 37 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠100% (168 of 26,862 speakers). This Alvarado-Barnes is worse (more manipulative) than 99.40% of the peer group.
Alvarado-Barnes
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 37
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

99% percentile
025507510099.4% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos37 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 100.0%100.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Halo Effect: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.0%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 3.3%Halo EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos