Speaker summary
⁠80%1 analyzed article/video114 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Mark Sanford results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Anchoring Bias, and Begging the Question, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 57.9% saturation with 65.979 hits. Analysis detected 119.787 faulty-reasoning hits from 114 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 25.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠41% (16,744 of 28,364 speakers). This Mark Sanford is better (less manipulative) than 59.00% of the peer group.
Mark Sanford
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 114
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

41% percentile
025507510041.0% percentile
25.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos114 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 57.9%57.9%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 13.2%13.2%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 21.1%21.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 8.6%8.6%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 57.9%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 21.1%, sitewide 26.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 13.2%, sitewide 1.7%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 8.6%, sitewide 4.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos