Speaker summary
⁠54%1 analyzed article/video96 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Richard Paulsen results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Status Quo Bias, Begging the Question, and Appeal to Emotion, with Overconfidence Bias as the most egregious example at 47.9% saturation with 69 hits. Analysis detected 271.75 faulty-reasoning hits from 96 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 24.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠40% (17,268 of 28,364 speakers). This Richard Paulsen is better (less manipulative) than 60.90% of the peer group.
Richard Paulsen
Speaker details
Total words: 96
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

39% percentile
025507510039.1% percentile
24.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos96 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 47.9%47.9%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 43.1%43.1%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 21.5%21.5%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Speaker 15.3%15.3%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 15.3%15.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 22.9%22.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 15.3%15.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 13.2%13.2%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 47.9%, sitewide 4.6%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 43.1%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 22.9%, sitewide 15.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 21.5%, sitewide 1.7%Anecdotal: Speaker 15.3%, sitewide 5.2%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 15.3%, sitewide 9.1%Bandwagon: Speaker 15.3%, sitewide 2.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 13.2%, sitewide 8.1%Overconfidence BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos