Speaker summary
⁠82%3 analyzed articles/videos191.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Elizabeth Schulze results contain 20 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Authority, and Negativity Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 37.2% saturation with 103 hits. Analysis detected 1,018.269 faulty-reasoning hits from 191.667 analyzed words across 3 videos, generating a BS Score of 25.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠42% (16,544 of 28,364 speakers). This Elizabeth Schulze is better (less manipulative) than 58.30% of the peer group.
Elizabeth Schulze
Speaker details
Total words: 191.667
Video count: 3
Authors
?

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

42% percentile
025507510041.7% percentile
25.7% BS Score3 analyzed videos191.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 55.0%55.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 51.6%51.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 49.3%49.3%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 38.7%38.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 37.2%37.2%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 30.0%30.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 45.0%45.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 28.5%28.5%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 19.3%19.3%Genetic FallacySitewide 1.4%Speaker 15.1%15.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Slippery Slope: Speaker 55.0%, sitewide 1.7%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 51.6%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 49.3%, sitewide 11.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 45.0%, sitewide 19.2%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 38.7%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 37.2%, sitewide 3.3%Loss Aversion: Speaker 30.0%, sitewide 2.5%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 28.5%, sitewide 7.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 23.5%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 25.8%, sitewide 15.9%Recency Bias: Speaker 19.3%, sitewide 2.7%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 16.8%, sitewide 9.1%Genetic Fallacy: Speaker 15.1%, sitewide 1.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 15.1%, sitewide 2.0%In-Group Bias: Speaker 15.0%, sitewide 6.9%False Dilemma: Speaker 14.8%, sitewide 1.5%Sunk Cost Effect: Speaker 13.8%, sitewide 0.3%Burden of Proof: Speaker 7.3%, sitewide 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 7.3%, sitewide 2.7%Primacy Effect: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 0.9%Slippery SlopeSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos