Speaker summary
39%9 analyzed articles/videos213 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Center for Strategic and International Studies results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Biased Writer Voice, and Hasty Generalization, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 50.1% saturation with 210 hits. Analysis detected 434.599 faulty-reasoning hits from 213 analyzed words across 9 articles, generating a BS Score of 17.9% and a BS Rank of 29% (20,365 of 28,364 speakers). This Center for Strategic and International Studies is better (less manipulative) than 71.80% of the peer group.

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

28% percentile
025507510028.2% percentile
17.9% BS Score9 analyzed videos213 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 50.1%50.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 10.0%10.0%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 12.8%12.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 13.8%13.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 10.7%10.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 10.0%10.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 50.1%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Speaker 13.8%, sitewide 6.7%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 12.8%, sitewide 4.0%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 10.0%, sitewide 8.1%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 10.0%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate