Speaker summary
⁠53%1 analyzed article/video387 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Center for an Urban Future results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Pessimism Bias, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 20.7% saturation with 80 hits. Analysis detected 166 faulty-reasoning hits from 387 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 10.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠15% (38,598 of 45,142 speakers). This Center for an Urban Future is better (less manipulative) than 85.50% of the peer group.
Center for an Urban Future
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠15%Center for an Urban Future (selected)11%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 387
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

15% percentile
025507510014.5% percentile
10.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos387 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 2.8%2.8%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 9.0%9.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 10.3%10.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 20.7%20.7%

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 2.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 20.7%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 10.3%, sitewide 3.3%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 9.0%, sitewide 1.9%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos