Speaker summary
⁠55%1 analyzed article/video92 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Patricia Kelmar results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, In-Group Bias, and Loss Aversion, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 51.1% saturation with 52.875 hits. Analysis detected 190.875 faulty-reasoning hits from 92 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 30.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠48% (14,790 of 28,364 speakers). This Patricia Kelmar is better (less manipulative) than 52.10% of the peer group.
Patricia Kelmar
Speaker details
Total words: 92
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

48% percentile
025507510047.9% percentile
30.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos92 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 51.1%51.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 32.6%32.6%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 17.4%17.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 32.6%32.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 17.4%17.4%

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 51.1%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 32.6%, sitewide 26.9%In-Group Bias: Speaker 32.6%, sitewide 6.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 17.4%, sitewide 19.2%Loss Aversion: Speaker 17.4%, sitewide 2.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos