Speaker summary
⁠82%1 analyzed article/video74 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Casey Gilfoil results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Self-Serving Bias, and Fundamental Attribution Error, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 70.3% saturation with 78 hits. Analysis detected 320.933 faulty-reasoning hits from 74 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 53.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠73% (7,830 of 28,364 speakers). This Casey Gilfoil is worse (more manipulative) than 72.40% of the peer group.
Casey Gilfoil
Speaker details
Total words: 74
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

72% percentile
025507510072.4% percentile
53.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos74 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 97.5%97.5%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 74.2%74.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 70.3%70.3%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 35.1%35.1%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 35.1%35.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 28.8%28.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 35.1%35.1%

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%120%120%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 97.5%, sitewide 3.7%Ad Hominem: Speaker 74.2%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 70.3%, sitewide 15.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 35.1%, sitewide 2.7%Negativity Bias: Speaker 35.1%, sitewide 19.2%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 35.1%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 28.8%, sitewide 11.1%Self-Serving BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos