Speaker summary
⁠83%1 analyzed article/video67 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Peter Cancro results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Unattributed Quote, and Negativity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 88.1% saturation with 59 hits. Analysis detected 177 faulty-reasoning hits from 67 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 52.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠72% (7,931 of 28,364 speakers). This Peter Cancro is worse (more manipulative) than 72.00% of the peer group.
Peter Cancro
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 67
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

72% percentile
025507510072.0% percentile
52.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos67 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 88.1%88.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 52.2%52.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 52.2%52.2%Primacy EffectSitewide 0.9%Speaker 35.8%35.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 35.8%35.8%

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%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 88.1%, sitewide 5.3%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 52.2%, sitewide 7.5%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 52.2%, sitewide 1.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 35.8%, sitewide 19.2%Primacy Effect: Speaker 35.8%, sitewide 0.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos