Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video58.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Robin Givhan results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Horn Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 78.5% saturation with 62 hits. Analysis detected 209.545 faulty-reasoning hits from 58.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 38.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠58% (12,169 of 28,364 speakers). This Robin Givhan is worse (more manipulative) than 57.10% of the peer group.
Robin Givhan
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 58.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

57% percentile
025507510057.1% percentile
38.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos58.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 78.5%78.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 65.6%65.6%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 35.4%35.4%Horn EffectSitewide 1.0%Speaker 28.5%28.5%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 26.8%26.8%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 20.3%20.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 19.0%19.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 35.9%35.9%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 78.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 65.6%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 35.9%, sitewide 26.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 35.4%, sitewide 2.2%Horn Effect: Speaker 28.5%, sitewide 1.0%Anecdotal: Speaker 26.8%, sitewide 5.2%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 20.3%, sitewide 1.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 19.0%, sitewide 0.8%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos