Speaker summary
⁠60%2 analyzed articles/videos64.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sausalito results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Primacy Effect, and Burden of Proof, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 37.4% saturation with 37 hits. Analysis detected 203 faulty-reasoning hits from 64.5 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 29.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠47% (15,107 of 28,364 speakers). This Sausalito is better (less manipulative) than 53.30% of the peer group.
Sausalito
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 64.5
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

47% percentile
025507510046.7% percentile
29.3% BS Score2 analyzed videos64.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 37.4%37.4%Primacy EffectSitewide 0.9%Speaker 37.4%37.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 37.4%37.4%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 30.3%30.3%Blind-Spot BiasSitewide 0.2%Speaker 16.2%16.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 16.2%16.2%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 30.3%30.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 37.4%, sitewide 0.8%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 37.4%, sitewide 3.3%Primacy Effect: Speaker 37.4%, sitewide 0.9%Burden of Proof: Speaker 30.3%, sitewide 0.4%Framing Effect: Speaker 30.3%, sitewide 26.9%Blind-Spot Bias: Speaker 16.2%, sitewide 0.2%Optimism Bias: Speaker 16.2%, sitewide 6.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos