Speaker summary
⁠84%1 analyzed article/video84.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Daniel Robelo results contain 10 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Politically Left Leaning Bias, and Indoctrination, with In-Group Bias as the most egregious example at 60.6% saturation with 66.375 hits. Analysis detected 462.476 faulty-reasoning hits from 84.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 38.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠57% (12,327 of 28,364 speakers). This Daniel Robelo is worse (more manipulative) than 56.50% of the peer group.
Daniel Robelo
Speaker details
Total words: 84.667
Article count: 1
Authors
?

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

57% percentile
025507510056.5% percentile
38.1% BS Score1 analyzed videos84.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 61.6%61.6%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 60.6%60.6%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 45.2%45.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 45.2%45.2%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 38.4%38.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 44.2%44.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 26.0%26.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 26.0%26.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 9.6%9.6%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 24.0%24.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Indoctrination: Speaker 61.6%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group Bias: Speaker 60.6%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Speaker 45.2%, sitewide 6.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 45.2%, sitewide 2.0%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 44.2%, sitewide 15.9%False Dilemma: Speaker 38.4%, sitewide 1.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 24.0%, sitewide 26.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 26.0%, sitewide 7.5%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 26.0%, sitewide 8.1%Begging the Question: Speaker 9.6%, sitewide 1.7%IndoctrinationSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos