Speaker summary
â 68% 5 analyzed articles/videos 337.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Madison Cercy results contain 22 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem , Appeal to Authority , and Red Herring , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 42.5% saturation with 234 hits . Analysis detected 1,429.989 faulty-reasoning hits from 337.333 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 13.2% and a BS Rank of â 19% (21,954 of 26,850 speakers). This Madison Cercy is better (less manipulative) than 81.80% of the peer group. Madison Cercy
Speaker details
Total words: 337.333
Article count: 5
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed speakers
18% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 18.2% percentile 13.2% BS Score5 analyzed videos337.3 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0â50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Ad Hominem Sitewide 2.2% Speaker 36.0% 36.0% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Speaker 42.5% 42.5% Red Herring Sitewide 0.7% Speaker 26.7% 26.7% Self-Serving Bias Sitewide 3.7% Speaker 21.5% 21.5% Politically Right Leaning⌠Sitewide 1.4% Speaker 18.0% 18.0% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Speaker 11.6% 11.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Speaker 22.2% 22.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Speaker 16.4% 16.4% Tu Quoque Sitewide 0.2% Speaker 10.0% 10.0% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Speaker 8.7% 8.7% 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 42.5%, sitewide 15.9% Ad Hominem: Speaker 36.0%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect: Speaker 11.6%, sitewide 26.9% Red Herring: Speaker 26.7%, sitewide 0.7% Appeal to Authority: Speaker 22.2%, sitewide 11.1% Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 21.5%, sitewide 3.7% Politically Right Leaning Bias: Speaker 18.0%, sitewide 1.4% Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 16.4%, sitewide 5.3% Confirmation Bias: Speaker 14.6%, sitewide 7.5% Tu Quoque: Speaker 10.0%, sitewide 0.2% In-Group Bias: Speaker 9.1%, sitewide 6.9% Availability Heuristic: Speaker 6.7%, sitewide 9.1% Indoctrination: Speaker 8.7%, sitewide 0.0% Straw Man: Speaker 8.2%, sitewide 0.9% False Dilemma: Speaker 7.4%, sitewide 1.5% Halo Effect: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 6.7% Actor-Observer Bias: Speaker 6.7%, sitewide 0.6% Circular Reasoning: Speaker 6.4%, sitewide 0.1% Begging the Question: Speaker 5.8%, sitewide 1.7% Anecdotal: Speaker 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Bandwagon: Speaker 3.6%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 2.0%, sitewide 0.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide rate Speaker rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst