Speaker summary
⁠73%1 analyzed article/video89.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Noah Berger results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Negativity Bias, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 89.3% saturation with 93.353 hits. Analysis detected 345.353 faulty-reasoning hits from 89.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 51.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠72% (8,096 of 28,364 speakers). This Noah Berger is worse (more manipulative) than 71.50% of the peer group.
Noah Berger
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 89.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

72% percentile
025507510071.5% percentile
51.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos89.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 89.3%89.3%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 39.3%39.3%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 39.3%39.3%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 39.3%39.3%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 89.3%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 39.3%, sitewide 19.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 39.3%, sitewide 0.0%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 39.3%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos