Speaker summary
⁠96%1 analyzed article/video68 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emily Elena Dugdale results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Begging the Question as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 340 faulty-reasoning hits from 68 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 71.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠80% (5,768 of 28,364 speakers). This Emily Elena Dugdale is worse (more manipulative) than 79.70% of the peer group.
Emily Elena Dugdale
Speaker details
Total words: 68
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

80% percentile
025507510079.7% percentile
71.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos68 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 55.9%55.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 55.9%55.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 44.1%44.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 44.1%44.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Begging the Question: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 1.7%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 5.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 55.9%, sitewide 11.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 55.9%, sitewide 2.7%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 44.1%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 44.1%, sitewide 26.9%Begging the QuestionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos