Speaker summary
44%6 analyzed articles/videos129.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Cambridge University results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, In-Group Bias, and Unattributed Quote, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 25.2% saturation with 53 hits. Analysis detected 220 faulty-reasoning hits from 129.667 analyzed words across 6 articles, generating a BS Score of 14.4% and a BS Rank of 23% (35,086 of 45,558 speakers). This Cambridge University is better (less manipulative) than 77.00% of the peer group.
Cambridge University
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
0%Paul Heideman1%
0%The Brookings Institution1%
0%Conor Heffernan1%
0%Gen Jack Keane1%
0%Katy Longshore1%
23%Cambridge University (selected)15%
100%291 Brewhouse100%
100%21 Grams100%
100%2035 Initiative100%
100%1X representative100%
100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 129.667
Article count: 6
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

23% percentile
025507510023.0% percentile
14.4% BS Score6 analyzed videos129.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 24.4%24.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 14.3%14.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 25.2%25.2%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 14.3%14.3%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 8.6%8.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 11.4%11.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 8.6%8.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 8.6%8.6%

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 14.3%, sitewide 26.9%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 25.2%, sitewide 15.9%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 24.4%, sitewide 1.1%In-Group Bias: Speaker 14.3%, sitewide 6.9%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 11.4%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 8.6%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 8.6%, sitewide 5.3%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 8.6%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate