Speaker summary
⁠92%1 analyzed article/video15 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Manhattan District Attorney’s Office results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Fundamental Attribution Error as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 15 hits. Analysis detected 45 faulty-reasoning hits from 15 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠91% (2,621 of 28,364 speakers). This Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is worse (more manipulative) than 90.80% of the peer group.
Manhattan District Attorney’s Office
Speaker details
Total words: 15
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

91% percentile
025507510090.8% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos15 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 2.7%Negativity Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution ErrorSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos