Speaker summary
⁠29%1 analyzed article/video109.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Appeal to Authority, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.2% saturation with 47 hits. Analysis detected 188 faulty-reasoning hits from 109.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 18.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠29% (20,125 of 28,364 speakers). This Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) is better (less manipulative) than 71.00% of the peer group.
Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD)
Speaker details
Total words: 109.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

29% percentile
025507510029.0% percentile
18.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos109.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 27.4%27.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 27.4%27.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 27.4%27.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 32.2%32.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 4.8%4.8%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 4.8%4.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 4.8%4.8%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 32.2%, sitewide 19.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 27.4%, sitewide 0.8%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 27.4%, sitewide 11.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 27.4%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 5.3%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 1.9%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos