Speaker summary
⁠31%1 analyzed article/video43.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hannah Pingree results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion and Negativity Bias, with False Dilemma as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 31 hits. Analysis detected 93 faulty-reasoning hits from 43.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 50% and a BS Rank of ⁠69% (8,923 of 28,364 speakers). This Hannah Pingree is worse (more manipulative) than 68.50% of the peer group.
Hannah Pingree
Speaker details
Total words: 43.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

69% percentile
025507510068.5% percentile
50.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos43.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

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 50.0%, sitewide 1.5%Loss Aversion: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 2.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%False DilemmaSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos