Speaker summary
⁠57%1 analyzed article/video106.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Dan Lorenc results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Biased Writer Voice, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 40% saturation with 64 hits. Analysis detected 262 faulty-reasoning hits from 106.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 29.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (20,925 of 40,668 speakers). This Dan Lorenc is better (less manipulative) than 51.50% of the peer group.
Dan Lorenc
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%MARGARET BRENNAN1%
⁠0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
⁠49%Dan Lorenc (selected)30%
⁠100%314 Action Fund100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 106.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

49% percentile
025507510048.5% percentile
29.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos106.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 45.0%45.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 40.0%40.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 30.0%30.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 20.0%20.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 20.0%20.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 20.0%20.0%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 45.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 40.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 30.0%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 20.0%, sitewide 26.9%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 20.0%, sitewide 5.3%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 20.0%, sitewide 7.5%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos