Speaker summary
⁠89%1 analyzed article/video84 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Representative David Valadao (R-Calif.) results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Negativity Bias, and Anchoring Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 77.4% saturation with 65 hits. Analysis detected 265 faulty-reasoning hits from 84 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 39.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (12,000 of 28,364 speakers). This Representative David Valadao (R-Calif.) is worse (more manipulative) than 57.70% of the peer group.
Representative David Valadao (R-Calif.)
Speaker details
Total words: 84
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

58% percentile
025507510057.7% percentile
39.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos84 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 77.4%77.4%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 39.3%39.3%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 38.1%38.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 38.1%38.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 38.1%38.1%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 22.6%22.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 39.3%39.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 22.6%22.6%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 77.4%, sitewide 15.9%Loss Aversion: Speaker 39.3%, sitewide 2.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 39.3%, sitewide 19.2%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 38.1%, sitewide 4.0%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 38.1%, sitewide 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 38.1%, sitewide 3.3%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 22.6%, sitewide 7.5%False Dilemma: Speaker 22.6%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos