Speaker summary
⁠69%1 analyzed article/video84 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Annie Shiel results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and In-Group Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 75% saturation with 70.875 hits. Analysis detected 317.25 faulty-reasoning hits from 84 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 34.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠54% (13,215 of 28,364 speakers). This Annie Shiel is worse (more manipulative) than 53.40% of the peer group.
Annie Shiel
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 84
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

53% percentile
025507510053.4% percentile
34.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos84 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 75.0%75.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 32.1%32.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 28.6%28.6%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 21.4%21.4%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 21.4%21.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 21.4%21.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 28.6%28.6%

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%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 15.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 32.1%, sitewide 1.7%Framing Effect: Speaker 28.6%, sitewide 26.9%In-Group Bias: Speaker 28.6%, sitewide 6.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 21.4%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 21.4%, sitewide 19.2%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 21.4%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos