Speaker summary
⁠74%1 analyzed article/video112.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Dennis Kelleher results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Appeal to Emotion, and Hasty Generalization, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 66.3% saturation with 112 hits. Analysis detected 570.527 faulty-reasoning hits from 112.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 43.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠61% (11,184 of 28,364 speakers). This Dennis Kelleher is worse (more manipulative) than 60.60% of the peer group.
Dennis Kelleher
Speaker details
Total words: 112.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

61% percentile
025507510060.6% percentile
43.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos112.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 66.4%66.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 66.3%66.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 57.8%57.8%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 57.8%57.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 49.7%49.7%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Speaker 33.1%33.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 24.8%24.8%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 16.6%16.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 16.6%16.6%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Ad Hominem: Speaker 66.4%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 66.3%, sitewide 11.1%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 57.8%, sitewide 8.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 57.8%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 49.7%, sitewide 15.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Speaker 33.1%, sitewide 3.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 24.8%, sitewide 7.5%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 16.6%, sitewide 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 16.6%, sitewide 3.3%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos