Speaker summary
84%7 analyzed articles/videos278 analyzed words
BS Summary: These City Council results contain 12 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Sunk Cost Effect, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 22.3% saturation with 62 hits. Analysis detected 403 faulty-reasoning hits from 278 analyzed words across 7 articles, generating a BS Score of 12.1% and a BS Rank of 16% (23,831 of 28,364 speakers). This City Council is better (less manipulative) than 84.00% of the peer group.
City Council

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

16% percentile
025507510016.0% percentile
12.1% BS Score7 analyzed videos278 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 21.9%21.9%Sunk Cost EffectSitewide 0.3%Speaker 15.8%15.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 9.0%9.0%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 9.0%9.0%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 7.5%7.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 8.6%8.6%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 7.5%7.5%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 22.3%22.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 14.0%14.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 14.0%14.0%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 22.3%, sitewide 26.9%Optimism Bias: Speaker 21.9%, sitewide 6.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 9.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 14.0%, sitewide 15.9%Sunk Cost Effect: Speaker 15.8%, sitewide 0.3%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 14.0%, sitewide 11.1%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 9.0%, sitewide 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 8.6%, sitewide 3.3%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 6.9%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 2.2%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 1.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate