Speaker summary
⁠76%2 analyzed articles/videos71.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Burden of Proof, and Confirmation Bias, with Hindsight Bias as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 219.921 faulty-reasoning hits from 71.667 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 66.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (6,368 of 28,364 speakers). This Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission is worse (more manipulative) than 77.60% of the peer group.
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
Speaker details
Total words: 71.667
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

78% percentile
025507510077.6% percentile
66.4% BS Score2 analyzed videos71.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 69.4%69.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 69.4%69.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 59.7%59.7%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 69.4%69.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 30.6%30.6%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 1.4%Burden of Proof: Speaker 69.4%, sitewide 0.4%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 69.4%, sitewide 7.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 69.4%, sitewide 19.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 59.7%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 30.6%, sitewide 11.1%Hindsight BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos