Speaker summary
⁠84%1 analyzed article/video129.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Avelino Valencia results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Begging the Question, and In-Group Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 72.9% saturation with 94.408 hits. Analysis detected 269.408 faulty-reasoning hits from 129.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 30.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (14,580 of 28,364 speakers). This Avelino Valencia is better (less manipulative) than 51.40% of the peer group.
Avelino Valencia
Speaker details
Total words: 129.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

49% percentile
025507510048.6% percentile
30.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos129.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 72.9%72.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 30.8%30.8%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 30.8%30.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 27.3%27.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 11.5%11.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 11.5%11.5%

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 72.9%, sitewide 26.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 30.8%, sitewide 0.8%Begging the Question: Speaker 30.8%, sitewide 1.7%In-Group Bias: Speaker 27.3%, sitewide 6.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 11.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 11.5%, sitewide 11.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos