Speaker summary
ā 88%2 analyzed articles/videos167 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Warren results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Recency Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 70.7% saturation with 118 hits. Analysis detected 321 faulty-reasoning hits from 167 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 32% and a BS Rank of ā 53% (21,485 of 45,145 speakers). This Warren is worse (more manipulative) than 52.40% of the peer group.
Warren
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
ā 0%Paul Heideman1%
ā 0%The Brookings Institution1%
ā 0%Conor Heffernan1%
ā 0%Gen Jack Keane1%
ā 0%Katy Longshore1%
ā 53%Warren (selected)33%
ā 100%291 Brewhouse100%
ā 100%21 Grams100%
ā 100%2035 Initiative100%
ā 100%1X representative100%
ā 100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 167
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

52% percentile
025507510052.4% percentile
32.0% BS Score2 analyzed videos167 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0ā€“75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 70.7%70.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.9%50.9%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 21.6%21.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 21.6%21.6%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 19.8%19.8%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 7.8%7.8%

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 70.7%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.9%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 21.6%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Speaker 21.6%, sitewide 2.7%Begging the Question: Speaker 19.8%, sitewide 1.7%Slippery Slope: Speaker 7.8%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos