Speaker summary
⁠53%5 analyzed articles/videos233.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Annie Andrews results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, In-Group Bias, and Anecdotal, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 35.7% saturation with 83.408 hits. Analysis detected 358.877 faulty-reasoning hits from 233.333 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 12.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠17% (23,590 of 28,364 speakers). This Annie Andrews is better (less manipulative) than 83.20% of the peer group.
Annie Andrews

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

17% percentile
025507510016.8% percentile
12.4% BS Score5 analyzed videos233.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 21.6%21.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 35.8%35.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 13.6%13.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 7.0%7.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 13.6%13.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 15.6%15.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 10.8%10.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 4.4%4.4%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 5.7%5.7%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 35.8%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 13.6%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 21.6%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 7.0%, sitewide 19.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 15.6%, sitewide 6.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 13.6%, sitewide 1.7%Anecdotal: Speaker 10.8%, sitewide 5.2%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 4.4%, sitewide 9.1%False Dilemma: Speaker 5.7%, sitewide 1.5%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 4.4%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 4.4%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos