Speaker summary
⁠46%1 analyzed article/video42 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Klanecky results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Negativity Bias, and Loss Aversion, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 57.1% saturation with 24 hits. Analysis detected 108 faulty-reasoning hits from 42 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 51.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠72% (8,101 of 28,364 speakers). This David Klanecky is worse (more manipulative) than 71.40% of the peer group.
David Klanecky
Speaker details
Total words: 42
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

71% percentile
025507510071.4% percentile
51.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos42 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 57.1%57.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 57.1%57.1%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 42.9%42.9%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 42.9%42.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 57.1%57.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 57.1%, sitewide 0.8%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 57.1%, sitewide 11.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 57.1%, sitewide 19.2%Loss Aversion: Speaker 42.9%, sitewide 2.5%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 42.9%, sitewide 3.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos