Speaker summary
⁠57%5 analyzed articles/videos743.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amil Niazi results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Appeal to Emotion, and Halo Effect, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 18.3% saturation with 147.792 hits. Analysis detected 1,283.784 faulty-reasoning hits from 743.667 analyzed words across 5 articles, generating a BS Score of 6.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (27,085 of 28,364 speakers). This Amil Niazi is better (less manipulative) than 95.50% of the peer group.
Amil Niazi
Speaker details
Total words: 743.667
Article count: 5
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

5% percentile
02550751004.5% percentile
6.4% BS Score5 analyzed videos743.7 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 4.8%4.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 6.5%6.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 18.3%18.3%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 6.2%6.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 12.2%12.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 2.8%2.8%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 6.1%6.1%Appeal to NatureSitewide 0.2%Speaker 4.7%4.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 13.4%13.4%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Speaker 5.2%5.2%

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 4.8%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 6.5%, sitewide 19.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 18.3%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 15.9%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 13.4%, sitewide 9.1%Halo Effect: Speaker 12.2%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 9.4%, sitewide 11.1%Anecdotal: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 5.2%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 2.8%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 6.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 6.2%, sitewide 0.0%False Dilemma: Speaker 6.1%, sitewide 1.5%Optimism Bias: Speaker 5.6%, sitewide 6.0%Bandwagon: Speaker 5.5%, sitewide 2.2%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 4.0%, sitewide 5.3%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 5.2%, sitewide 1.9%Appeal to Nature: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 0.2%Ad Hominem: Speaker 4.0%, sitewide 2.2%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 3.7%Recency Bias: Speaker 2.0%, sitewide 2.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 1.6%, sitewide 2.0%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos