Speaker summary
⁠48%2 analyzed articles/videos216.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Olsen results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Optimism Bias, and Anchoring Bias, with Overconfidence Bias as the most egregious example at 18.3% saturation with 50 hits. Analysis detected 225.314 faulty-reasoning hits from 216.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 10.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠13% (24,201 of 27,799 speakers). This David Olsen is better (less manipulative) than 87.10% of the peer group.
David Olsen
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 216.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

13% percentile
025507510012.9% percentile
10.7% BS Score2 analyzed videos216.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 2.6%2.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 20.8%20.8%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 18.3%18.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 2.6%2.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 20.9%20.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 13.5%13.5%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 6.2%6.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 5.4%5.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 6.2%6.2%

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 2.6%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 20.9%, sitewide 11.1%Optimism Bias: Speaker 20.8%, sitewide 6.0%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 18.3%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 2.6%, sitewide 15.9%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 13.5%, sitewide 4.0%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 5.4%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Speaker 6.2%, sitewide 6.9%False Dilemma: Speaker 6.2%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos