Speaker summary
⁠47%2 analyzed articles/videos84 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Susan Schwartz results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 30.2% saturation with 38 hits. Analysis detected 155.125 faulty-reasoning hits from 84 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 15.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠24% (21,568 of 28,364 speakers). This Susan Schwartz is better (less manipulative) than 76.00% of the peer group.
Susan Schwartz
Speaker details
Total words: 84
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

24% percentile
025507510024.0% percentile
15.8% BS Score2 analyzed videos84 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 17.5%17.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 29.8%29.8%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 12.7%12.7%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 15.9%15.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 30.2%30.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 15.9%15.9%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 15.1%15.1%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 2.4%2.4%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 3.2%3.2%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 30.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 29.8%, sitewide 15.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 17.5%, sitewide 0.8%Anecdotal: Speaker 15.9%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 15.9%, sitewide 4.0%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 15.1%, sitewide 5.3%Indoctrination: Speaker 12.7%, sitewide 0.0%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 2.4%, sitewide 9.1%False Dilemma: Speaker 3.2%, sitewide 1.5%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos