Speaker summary
⁠47%3 analyzed articles/videos179 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Leo results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Burden of Proof, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 45% saturation with 67 hits. Analysis detected 320 faulty-reasoning hits from 179 analyzed words across 3 articles and videos, generating a BS Score of 26.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (16,067 of 28,364 speakers). This Leo is better (less manipulative) than 56.60% of the peer group.
Leo
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 179
Content count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

43% percentile
025507510043.4% percentile
26.8% BS Score3 analyzed videos179 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 45.0%45.0%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 24.8%24.8%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 24.8%24.8%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 20.8%20.8%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 24.8%24.8%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 24.8%24.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 24.8%24.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 24.8%24.8%

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 45.0%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 11.1%Burden of Proof: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 0.4%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 7.5%False Dilemma: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 1.5%In-Group Bias: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 6.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 20.8%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos