Speaker summary
⁠81%1 analyzed article/video86 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chiara Barbieri results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Personal Incredulity, Appeal to Emotion, and Availability Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 49% saturation with 42.155 hits. Analysis detected 113.763 faulty-reasoning hits from 86 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 27.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (15,874 of 28,364 speakers). This Chiara Barbieri is better (less manipulative) than 56.00% of the peer group.
Chiara Barbieri
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠0%Mike Muse1%
⁠0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
⁠44%Chiara Barbieri (selected)28%
⁠100%4MATIV100%
⁠100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 86
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

44% percentile
025507510044.0% percentile
27.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos86 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 49.0%49.0%Personal IncredulitySitewide 0.2%Speaker 26.1%26.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 25.9%25.9%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 13.2%13.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 22.3%22.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Negativity Bias: Speaker 49.0%, sitewide 19.2%Personal Incredulity: Speaker 26.1%, sitewide 0.2%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 25.9%, sitewide 9.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 22.3%, sitewide 15.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 13.2%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos