Speaker summary
⁠56%1 analyzed article/video73.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Utah Democratic Party results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Hasty Generalization, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 69.1% saturation with 57 hits. Analysis detected 251 faulty-reasoning hits from 73.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 33.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠52% (13,852 of 28,364 speakers). This Utah Democratic Party is worse (more manipulative) than 51.20% of the peer group.
Utah Democratic Party
Speaker details
Total words: 73.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

51% percentile
025507510051.2% percentile
33.1% BS Score1 analyzed videos73.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 69.1%69.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 30.9%30.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 38.2%38.2%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 19.1%19.1%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 19.1%19.1%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 19.1%19.1%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 19.1%19.1%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 69.1%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 38.2%, sitewide 8.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 30.9%, sitewide 0.8%Burden of Proof: Speaker 19.1%, sitewide 0.4%Loss Aversion: Speaker 19.1%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 19.1%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Speaker 19.1%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos