Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video53.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Roman Rozhavsky results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Indoctrination, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 60 hits. Analysis detected 265 faulty-reasoning hits from 53.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 62.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠76% (6,794 of 28,364 speakers). This Roman Rozhavsky is worse (more manipulative) than 76.00% of the peer group.
Roman Rozhavsky
Speaker details
Total words: 53.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

76% percentile
025507510076.0% percentile
62.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos53.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 75.0%75.0%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

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%120%120%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 75.0%, sitewide 15.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.0%Slippery Slope: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos