Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video45.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Nela Richardson results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Overconfidence Bias, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 85.3% saturation with 43.5 hits. Analysis detected 139.5 faulty-reasoning hits from 45.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 32.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (14,083 of 28,364 speakers). This Nela Richardson is worse (more manipulative) than 50.40% of the peer group.
Nela Richardson
Speaker details
Total words: 45.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

50% percentile
025507510050.4% percentile
32.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos45.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 85.3%85.3%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 29.4%29.4%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 20.6%20.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 20.6%20.6%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 20.6%20.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 29.4%29.4%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 20.6%20.6%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%Optimism Bias: Speaker 85.3%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 29.4%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 29.4%, sitewide 4.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 0.0%Recency Bias: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 2.7%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 1.1%Optimism BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos