Speaker summary
⁠70%1 analyzed article/video93.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sam van Wassenberg results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Appeal to Emotion, and Framing Effect, with False Dilemma as the most egregious example at 62.5% saturation with 65.625 hits. Analysis detected 240.625 faulty-reasoning hits from 93.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 31.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠50% (14,436 of 28,364 speakers). This Sam van Wassenberg is better (less manipulative) than 50.90% of the peer group.
Sam van Wassenberg
Speaker details
Total words: 93.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

49% percentile
025507510049.1% percentile
31.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos93.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 62.5%62.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 25.0%25.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%False Dilemma: Speaker 62.5%, sitewide 1.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 26.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 0.8%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 15.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 8.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 4.6%False DilemmaSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos