Speaker summary
⁠71%1 analyzed article/video157 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Kim Erndt-Pitcher results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Pessimism Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 46.6% saturation with 81.26 hits. Analysis detected 377.163 faulty-reasoning hits from 157 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 21.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠35% (17,407 of 26,730 speakers). This Kim Erndt-Pitcher is better (less manipulative) than 65.10% of the peer group.
Kim Erndt-Pitcher
Speaker details
Total words: 157
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

35% percentile
025507510034.9% percentile
21.9% BS Score1 analyzed videos157 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 46.6%46.6%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 24.6%24.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 33.2%33.2%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 15.2%15.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 19.7%19.7%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 10.7%10.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 10.7%10.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 14.3%14.3%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 46.6%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 33.2%, sitewide 19.2%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 24.6%, sitewide 1.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 19.7%, sitewide 11.1%Recency Bias: Speaker 15.2%, sitewide 2.7%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 14.3%, sitewide 8.1%Loss Aversion: Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos