Speaker summary
48% 1 analyzed article/video 759.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Maria Mudd Ruth results contain 20 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Biased Writer Voice , and Halo Effect , with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 13% saturation with 150 hits . Analysis detected 1,166.231 faulty-reasoning hits from 759.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5.7% and a BS Rank of 4% (25,428 of 26,339 speakers). This Maria Mudd Ruth is better (less manipulative) than 96.50% of the peer group. Maria Mudd Ruth
Speaker details
Total words: 759.667
Article count: 1
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed speakers
4% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 3.5% percentile 5.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos759.7 analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Speaker SitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Speaker 13.0% 13.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Speaker 1.8% 1.8% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Speaker 9.0% 9.0% Attempt to Sell a Product… Sitewide 0.5% Speaker 5.0% 5.0% False Dilemma Sitewide 1.5% Speaker 5.3% 5.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Speaker 4.4% 4.4% Hindsight Bias Sitewide 1.4% Speaker 4.9% 4.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Speaker 12.4% 12.4% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Speaker 8.3% 8.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Speaker 6.5% 6.5% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 5% 5% 10% 10% 15% 15% 20% 20% 25% 25% Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 12.4%, sitewide 15.9% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 13.0%, sitewide 0.8% Appeal to Authority: Speaker 1.8%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Speaker 6.5%, sitewide 9.1% Indoctrination: Speaker 9.0%, sitewide 0.0% Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 8.3%, sitewide 5.3% Hasty Generalization: Speaker 4.4%, sitewide 8.1% Halo Effect: Speaker 8.1%, sitewide 6.7% Confirmation Bias: Speaker 5.5%, sitewide 7.5% Optimism Bias: Speaker 6.0%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Speaker 5.6%, sitewide 5.2% Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 5.3%, sitewide 3.3% False Dilemma: Speaker 5.3%, sitewide 1.5% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 0.5% Hindsight Bias: Speaker 4.9%, sitewide 1.4% Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 4.6% Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 3.7% Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 3.0%, sitewide 1.9% Begging the Question: Speaker 2.8%, sitewide 1.7% Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide rate Speaker rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst