Speaker summary
⁠98%1 analyzed article/video71 analyzed words
BS Summary: These C.C. results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Recency Bias, and Anecdotal, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 74.6% saturation with 53 hits. Analysis detected 195 faulty-reasoning hits from 71 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 39.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (12,048 of 28,364 speakers). This C.C. is worse (more manipulative) than 57.50% of the peer group.
C.C.
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 71
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

58% percentile
025507510057.5% percentile
39.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos71 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 74.7%74.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 42.3%42.3%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 42.3%42.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 32.4%32.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 32.4%32.4%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 25.4%25.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 25.4%25.4%

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%Optimism Bias: Speaker 74.7%, sitewide 6.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 42.3%, sitewide 0.8%Recency Bias: Speaker 42.3%, sitewide 2.7%Anecdotal: Speaker 32.4%, sitewide 5.2%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 32.4%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 25.4%, sitewide 11.1%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 25.4%, sitewide 1.1%Optimism BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos