Speaker summary
ā 88%1 analyzed article/video43 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sen. Chris Van Hollen results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Negativity Bias, and Straw Man, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 43 hits. Analysis detected 172 faulty-reasoning hits from 43 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ā 87% (3,866 of 28,364 speakers). This Sen. Chris Van Hollen is worse (more manipulative) than 86.40% of the peer group.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
ā 0%The Brookings Institution1%
ā 0%Gen Jack Keane1%
ā 0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
ā 0%Mike Muse1%
ā 0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
ā 87%Sen. Chris Van Hollen (selected)100%
ā 100%4MATIV100%
ā 100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
ā 100%314 Action Fund100%
ā 100%21 Grams100%
ā 100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 43
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

86% percentile
025507510086.4% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos43 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0ā€“125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%

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 Emotion: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 15.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 7.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 19.2%Straw Man: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 0.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos