Speaker summary
⁠33%3 analyzed articles/videos81.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Howard University results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Status Quo Bias, and Representativeness Heuristic, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 39.2% saturation with 49 hits. Analysis detected 127 faulty-reasoning hits from 81.5 analyzed words across 3 articles and videos, generating a BS Score of 25.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠42% (16,663 of 28,364 speakers). This Howard University is better (less manipulative) than 58.70% of the peer group.
Howard University
Speaker details
Total words: 81.5
Content count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

41% percentile
025507510041.3% percentile
25.4% BS Score3 analyzed videos81.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 39.2%39.2%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Speaker 23.2%23.2%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 23.2%23.2%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Speaker 16.0%16.0%

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%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 39.2%, sitewide 11.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Speaker 23.2%, sitewide 0.5%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 23.2%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 16.0%, sitewide 1.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos