Speaker summary
⁠46%1 analyzed article/video38.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ben Abbott results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Availability Heuristic, and Negativity Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 50% saturation with 29 hits. Analysis detected 174 faulty-reasoning hits from 38.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 50% and a BS Rank of ⁠71% (8,437 of 28,364 speakers). This Ben Abbott is worse (more manipulative) than 70.30% of the peer group.
Ben Abbott
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 38.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

70% percentile
025507510070.3% percentile
50.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos38.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 9.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 3.3%Slippery Slope: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos