Speaker summary
⁠28%3 analyzed articles/videos100 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chad Grunander results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Burden of Proof, and Appeal to Emotion, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 27.2% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 115 faulty-reasoning hits from 100 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 9.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠10% (25,545 of 28,364 speakers). This Chad Grunander is better (less manipulative) than 90.10% of the peer group.
Chad Grunander
Speaker details
Total words: 100
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

10% percentile
02550751009.9% percentile
9.3% BS Score3 analyzed videos100 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 1.9%1.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 27.2%27.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 3.9%3.9%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 7.3%7.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 13.6%13.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 1.9%1.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 27.2%, sitewide 11.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 1.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 3.9%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Speaker 13.6%, sitewide 6.7%Burden of Proof: Speaker 7.3%, sitewide 0.4%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 1.9%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos