Speaker summary
⁠83%1 analyzed article/video97.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amanda Jack results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Begging the Question, and Indoctrination, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 30% saturation with 39 hits. Analysis detected 210.75 faulty-reasoning hits from 97.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 24.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠40% (17,086 of 28,364 speakers). This Amanda Jack is better (less manipulative) than 60.20% of the peer group.
Amanda Jack
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 97.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

40% percentile
025507510039.8% percentile
24.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos97.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 43.1%43.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 36.9%36.9%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 20.0%20.0%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 20.0%20.0%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 20.0%20.0%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 19.2%19.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 8.5%8.5%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 30.0%30.0%

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%Begging the Question: Speaker 43.1%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 36.9%, sitewide 15.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 30.0%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 20.0%, sitewide 0.0%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 20.0%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Speaker 20.0%, sitewide 1.7%Negativity Bias: Speaker 8.5%, sitewide 19.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 19.2%, sitewide 1.5%Begging the QuestionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos