Speaker summary
⁠94%1 analyzed article/video52 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Inclusive Action results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Appeal to Authority, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 52 hits. Analysis detected 152 faulty-reasoning hits from 52 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 58.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (7,199 of 28,364 speakers). This Inclusive Action is worse (more manipulative) than 74.60% of the peer group.
Inclusive Action
Speaker details
Total words: 52
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

75% percentile
025507510074.6% percentile
58.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos52 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 53.9%53.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 46.1%46.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 46.1%46.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 46.1%46.1%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Loss Aversion: Speaker 53.9%, sitewide 2.5%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 46.1%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 46.1%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 46.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos