Speaker summary
⁠43%1 analyzed article/video70 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Shana Charles results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Self-Serving Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 41.7% saturation with 40 hits. Analysis detected 108 faulty-reasoning hits from 70 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 23.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠38% (17,635 of 28,364 speakers). This Shana Charles is better (less manipulative) than 62.20% of the peer group.
Shana Charles
Speaker details
Total words: 70
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

38% percentile
025507510037.8% percentile
23.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos70 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 41.7%41.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 41.7%41.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 12.5%12.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 12.5%12.5%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 9.1%9.1%

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%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 41.7%, sitewide 15.9%Loss Aversion: Speaker 41.7%, sitewide 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 12.5%, sitewide 3.3%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 12.5%, sitewide 3.7%False Dilemma: Speaker 9.1%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos