Speaker summary
⁠76%1 analyzed article/video46.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Caesar Rodney results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Appeal to Authority, with In-Group Bias as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 70 hits. Analysis detected 245 faulty-reasoning hits from 46.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 66.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠79% (6,125 of 28,364 speakers). This Caesar Rodney is worse (more manipulative) than 78.40% of the peer group.
Caesar Rodney
Speaker details
Total words: 46.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

78% percentile
025507510078.4% percentile
66.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos46.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%No True ScotsmanSitewide 0.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

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%120%120%In-Group Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 8.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.8%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 15.9%No True Scotsman: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.1%In-Group BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos