Speaker summary
⁠82%1 analyzed article/video112 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amira Hassan results contain 14 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Ad Hominem, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 88.4% saturation with 99 hits. Analysis detected 671.5 faulty-reasoning hits from 112 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 42.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠61% (11,266 of 28,364 speakers). This Amira Hassan is worse (more manipulative) than 60.30% of the peer group.
Amira Hassan
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠0%Mike Muse1%
⁠0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
⁠61%Amira Hassan (selected)43%
⁠100%4MATIV100%
⁠100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 112
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

60% percentile
025507510060.3% percentile
42.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos112 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 88.4%88.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 88.4%88.4%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 54.9%54.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 59.4%59.4%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 41.1%41.1%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 41.1%41.1%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Speaker 41.1%41.1%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 41.1%41.1%Genetic FallacySitewide 1.4%Speaker 27.7%27.7%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 27.7%27.7%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 88.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 88.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 59.4%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 54.9%, sitewide 2.2%Burden of Proof: Speaker 41.1%, sitewide 0.4%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 41.1%, sitewide 8.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Speaker 41.1%, sitewide 3.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 41.1%, sitewide 0.0%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 27.7%, sitewide 7.5%False Dilemma: Speaker 27.7%, sitewide 1.5%Genetic Fallacy: Speaker 27.7%, sitewide 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 27.7%, sitewide 3.3%Begging the Question: Speaker 22.8%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 11.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos