Speaker summary
ā 37%1 analyzed article/video94.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Carolina Landsmann results contain 2 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 81 hits. Analysis detected 122 faulty-reasoning hits from 94.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 37.7% and a BS Rank of ā 58% (15,723 of 37,373 speakers). This Carolina Landsmann is worse (more manipulative) than 57.90% of the peer group.
Carolina Landsmann
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
ā 0%The Brookings Institution1%
ā 0%Conor Heffernan1%
ā 0%Gen Jack Keane1%
ā 0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
ā 0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
ā 58%Carolina Landsmann (selected)38%
ā 100%314 Action Fund100%
ā 100%21 Grams100%
ā 100%2035 Initiative100%
ā 100%1X representative100%
ā 100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 94.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

58% percentile
025507510057.9% percentile
37.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos94.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0ā€“75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 25.3%25.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 11.1%Recency Bias: Speaker 25.3%, sitewide 2.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos