Speaker summary
⁠79%1 analyzed article/video142.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Stacey Smith results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Hasty Generalization, and In-Group Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 95 hits. Analysis detected 449.375 faulty-reasoning hits from 142.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 32.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (13,913 of 28,364 speakers). This Stacey Smith is worse (more manipulative) than 51.00% of the peer group.
Stacey Smith
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 142.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

51% percentile
025507510051.0% percentile
32.9% BS Score1 analyzed videos142.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 62.4%62.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 43.2%43.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 28.4%28.4%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 21.6%21.6%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 21.6%21.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 21.6%21.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 14.2%14.2%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Halo Effect: Speaker 62.4%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 5.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 43.2%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Speaker 28.4%, sitewide 6.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 21.6%, sitewide 7.5%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 21.6%, sitewide 2.7%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 21.6%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 14.2%, sitewide 15.9%Halo EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos