Speaker summary
⁠98%1 analyzed article/video61 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Chin results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Unattributed Quote, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 61 hits. Analysis detected 158 faulty-reasoning hits from 61 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 64.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (6,478 of 28,364 speakers). This Chin is worse (more manipulative) than 77.20% of the peer group.
Chin
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 61
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

77% percentile
025507510077.2% percentile
64.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos61 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 59.0%59.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 59.0%59.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 41.0%41.0%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 59.0%, sitewide 15.9%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 59.0%, sitewide 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 41.0%, sitewide 3.3%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos