Speaker summary
⁠35%1 analyzed article/video96 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Paul Brandeis Raushenbush results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect and Anecdotal, with False Dilemma as the most egregious example at 25.6% saturation with 23 hits. Analysis detected 63 faulty-reasoning hits from 96 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 23.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠40% (27,130 of 45,122 speakers). This Paul Brandeis Raushenbush is better (less manipulative) than 60.10% of the peer group.
Paul Brandeis Raushenbush
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠40%Paul Brandeis Raushenbush (selected)24%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 96
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

40% percentile
025507510039.9% percentile
23.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos96 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 25.6%25.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 18.9%18.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 25.6%25.6%

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 25.6%, sitewide 26.9%False Dilemma: Speaker 25.6%, sitewide 1.5%Anecdotal: Speaker 18.9%, sitewide 5.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos