Speaker summary
⁠52%2 analyzed articles/videos862.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Esther Charlestin results contain 22 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Framing Effect, and Appeal to Emotion, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 13.1% saturation with 122.697 hits. Analysis detected 1,337.687 faulty-reasoning hits from 862.667 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠3% (41,496 of 42,592 speakers). This Esther Charlestin is better (less manipulative) than 97.40% of the peer group.
Esther Charlestin
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠3%Esther Charlestin (selected)5%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 862.667
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

3% percentile
02550751002.6% percentile
4.7% BS Score2 analyzed videos862.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 6.8%6.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 1.5%1.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 6.1%6.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 13.1%13.1%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 0.6%0.6%Middle GroundSitewide 0.1%Speaker 5.7%5.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 5.5%5.5%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 9.6%9.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 4.0%4.0%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 5.2%5.2%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 6.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 6.1%, sitewide 15.9%Optimism Bias: Speaker 13.1%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 5.5%, sitewide 11.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 9.6%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 4.0%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Speaker 0.6%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 6.7%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 5.8%, sitewide 3.7%Middle Ground: Speaker 5.7%, sitewide 0.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 5.5%, sitewide 3.3%Anecdotal: Speaker 4.9%, sitewide 5.2%Begging the Question: Speaker 5.2%, sitewide 1.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 4.9%, sitewide 1.9%False Dilemma: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 1.5%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 2.7%, sitewide 2.2%Recency Bias: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%Composition/Division: Speaker 2.2%, sitewide 0.2%Appeal to Nature: Speaker 2.1%, sitewide 0.2%Indoctrination: Speaker 0.4%, sitewide 0.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos