Speaker summary
⁠52%3 analyzed articles/videos39.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Andrew Tate results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Fundamental Attribution Error, and Ad Hominem, with Out-Group Homogeneity Bias as the most egregious example at 82.2% saturation with 60 hits. Analysis detected 188 faulty-reasoning hits from 39.5 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 36.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠56% (12,733 of 28,364 speakers). This Andrew Tate is worse (more manipulative) than 55.10% of the peer group.
Andrew Tate
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 39.5
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

55% percentile
025507510055.1% percentile
36.8% BS Score3 analyzed videos39.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Speaker 82.2%82.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 56.2%56.2%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 43.8%43.8%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 24.7%24.7%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 24.7%24.7%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 13.7%13.7%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 12.3%12.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Speaker 82.2%, sitewide 3.1%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 56.2%, sitewide 8.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 43.8%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Speaker 24.7%, sitewide 2.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 24.7%, sitewide 6.9%Straw Man: Speaker 13.7%, sitewide 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 12.3%, sitewide 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos