Speaker summary
⁠77%3 analyzed articles/videos172 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Stanford University results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Overconfidence Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 34.9% saturation with 60 hits. Analysis detected 232 faulty-reasoning hits from 172 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 27% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (16,017 of 28,364 speakers). This Stanford University is better (less manipulative) than 56.50% of the peer group.
Stanford University

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

44% percentile
025507510043.5% percentile
27.0% BS Score3 analyzed videos172 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 34.9%34.9%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 26.2%26.2%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 32.6%32.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 25.0%25.0%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Speaker 16.3%16.3%

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%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 34.9%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 32.6%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 26.2%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 25.0%, sitewide 9.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 16.3%, sitewide 2.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos