Speaker summary
⁠67%1 analyzed article/video80 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Dan Denvir results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Quote-first Misdirection, Overconfidence Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with In-Group Bias as the most egregious example at 68.3% saturation with 82 hits. Analysis detected 396.75 faulty-reasoning hits from 80 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 42.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠61% (11,269 of 28,364 speakers). This Dan Denvir is worse (more manipulative) than 60.30% of the peer group.
Dan Denvir
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 80
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

60% percentile
025507510060.3% percentile
42.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos80 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 63.3%63.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 68.3%68.3%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 47.5%47.5%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 31.7%31.7%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 31.7%31.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 31.7%31.7%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 18.3%18.3%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%In-Group Bias: Speaker 68.3%, sitewide 6.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 63.3%, sitewide 0.0%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 47.5%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Speaker 31.7%, sitewide 6.7%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 31.7%, sitewide 8.1%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 31.7%, sitewide 1.1%Begging the Question: Speaker 18.3%, sitewide 1.7%In-Group BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos