Speaker summary
⁠81%2 analyzed articles/videos349.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Hugh Safford results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Pessimism Bias, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 44.8% saturation with 156.483 hits. Analysis detected 449.919 faulty-reasoning hits from 349.5 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 14.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠21% (22,609 of 28,364 speakers). This Hugh Safford is better (less manipulative) than 79.70% of the peer group.
Hugh Safford
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 349.5
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

20% percentile
025507510020.3% percentile
14.1% BS Score2 analyzed videos349.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 44.8%44.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 34.1%34.1%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 16.5%16.5%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 10.4%10.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 1.8%1.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 5.2%5.2%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 2.9%2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 2.9%2.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 8.3%8.3%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 44.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 34.1%, sitewide 15.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 16.5%, sitewide 0.0%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 10.4%, sitewide 1.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 8.3%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Speaker 5.2%, sitewide 6.9%Anecdotal: Speaker 1.8%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 3.3%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 1.4%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos