Speaker summary
⁠73%1 analyzed article/video132.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ryana Parks-Shaw results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Indoctrination, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 64.9% saturation with 103.133 hits. Analysis detected 549.522 faulty-reasoning hits from 132.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 38.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠57% (12,221 of 28,364 speakers). This Ryana Parks-Shaw is worse (more manipulative) than 56.90% of the peer group.
Ryana Parks-Shaw
Speaker details
Total words: 132.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

57% percentile
025507510056.9% percentile
38.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos132.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 64.9%64.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 62.5%62.5%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 41.8%41.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 42.0%42.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 42.0%42.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 12.6%12.6%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 21.0%21.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 21.0%21.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Optimism Bias: Speaker 64.9%, sitewide 6.0%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 62.5%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 42.0%, sitewide 15.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 42.0%, sitewide 3.3%Indoctrination: Speaker 41.8%, sitewide 0.0%Framing Effect: Speaker 12.6%, sitewide 26.9%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 21.0%, sitewide 9.1%Halo Effect: Speaker 21.0%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos