Speaker summary
⁠40%3 analyzed articles/videos520 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Christina Adkins results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Framing Effect, and Halo Effect, with Loss Aversion as the most egregious example at 13.2% saturation with 120 hits. Analysis detected 400 faulty-reasoning hits from 520 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 9.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (35,709 of 40,097 speakers). This Christina Adkins is better (less manipulative) than 89.10% of the peer group.
Christina Adkins
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠11%Christina Adkins (selected)10%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 520
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

11% percentile
025507510010.9% percentile
9.3% BS Score3 analyzed videos520 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 13.3%13.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 8.7%8.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 2.8%2.8%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 3.0%3.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 5.7%5.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 4.8%4.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 26.9%26.9%

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 26.9%, sitewide 26.9%Loss Aversion: Speaker 13.3%, sitewide 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 8.7%, sitewide 0.8%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 2.8%, sitewide 7.5%Halo Effect: Speaker 5.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Speaker 3.0%, sitewide 6.0%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 4.6%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos