Speaker summary
⁠86%1 analyzed article/video22 analyzed words
BS Summary: These U.S. PIRG results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 22 hits. Analysis detected 66 faulty-reasoning hits from 22 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠84% (4,568 of 28,364 speakers). This U.S. PIRG is worse (more manipulative) than 83.90% of the peer group.
U.S. PIRG
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠0%Mike Muse1%
⁠0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
⁠84%U.S. PIRG (selected)100%
⁠100%4MATIV100%
⁠100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 22
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

84% percentile
025507510083.9% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos22 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%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 Authority: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 7.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos