Speaker summary
⁠50%1 analyzed article/video82.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Luz Escamilla results contain 11 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Special Pleading, and Appeal to Emotion, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 20.8% saturation with 30 hits. Analysis detected 215.086 faulty-reasoning hits from 82.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 14.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠23% (22,056 of 28,364 speakers). This Luz Escamilla is better (less manipulative) than 77.80% of the peer group.
Luz Escamilla
Speaker details
Total words: 82.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

22% percentile
025507510022.2% percentile
14.9% BS Score1 analyzed videos82.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Special PleadingSitewide 0.3%Speaker 20.8%20.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 35.2%35.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 20.8%20.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 20.8%20.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 8.3%8.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 18.1%18.1%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 8.3%8.3%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 9.7%9.7%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 8.3%8.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 9.7%9.7%

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 35.2%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 18.1%, sitewide 26.9%Optimism Bias: Speaker 20.8%, sitewide 6.0%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 20.8%, sitewide 3.7%Special Pleading: Speaker 20.8%, sitewide 0.3%Negativity Bias: Speaker 8.3%, sitewide 19.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 8.1%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 2.2%Indoctrination: Speaker 8.3%, sitewide 0.0%Loss Aversion: Speaker 8.3%, sitewide 2.5%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 4.2%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos