Speaker summary
⁠78%2 analyzed articles/videos94 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Emma Vigeland results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Burden of Proof, with False Dilemma as the most egregious example at 60.6% saturation with 63.376 hits. Analysis detected 393.117 faulty-reasoning hits from 94 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 28.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠46% (15,549 of 28,364 speakers). This Emma Vigeland is better (less manipulative) than 54.80% of the peer group.
Emma Vigeland
Speaker details
Total words: 94
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

45% percentile
025507510045.2% percentile
28.1% BS Score2 analyzed videos94 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 60.6%60.6%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 40.1%40.1%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 33.8%33.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 33.8%33.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 33.8%33.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 33.8%33.8%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 12.5%12.5%Red HerringSitewide 0.7%Speaker 11.0%11.0%Genetic FallacySitewide 1.4%Speaker 11.0%11.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 33.8%33.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%False Dilemma: Speaker 60.6%, sitewide 1.5%Ad Hominem: Speaker 40.1%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 33.8%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 33.8%, sitewide 5.3%Burden of Proof: Speaker 33.8%, sitewide 0.4%Framing Effect: Speaker 33.8%, sitewide 26.9%In-Group Bias: Speaker 33.8%, sitewide 6.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 12.5%, sitewide 0.0%Genetic Fallacy: Speaker 11.0%, sitewide 1.4%Red Herring: Speaker 11.0%, sitewide 0.7%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 1.1%False DilemmaSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos