Speaker summary
⁠70%2 analyzed articles/videos104.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Irene Fernando results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and False Dilemma, with Status Quo Bias as the most egregious example at 38.2% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 315.625 faulty-reasoning hits from 104.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 24.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠40% (17,194 of 28,364 speakers). This Irene Fernando is better (less manipulative) than 60.60% of the peer group.
Irene Fernando
Speaker details
Total words: 104.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

39% percentile
025507510039.4% percentile
24.4% BS Score2 analyzed videos104.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 38.2%38.2%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 28.1%28.1%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 48.3%48.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 36.0%36.0%Special PleadingSitewide 0.3%Speaker 14.0%14.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 14.0%14.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 11.8%11.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 11.8%11.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 17.7%17.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Framing Effect: Speaker 48.3%, sitewide 26.9%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 38.2%, sitewide 2.2%Negativity Bias: Speaker 36.0%, sitewide 19.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 28.1%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 17.7%, sitewide 15.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 14.0%, sitewide 0.8%Special Pleading: Speaker 14.0%, sitewide 0.3%Anecdotal: Speaker 11.8%, sitewide 5.2%Optimism Bias: Speaker 11.8%, sitewide 6.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos