Speaker summary
⁠63%1 analyzed article/video33 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ghalibaf results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including False Dilemma, Indoctrination, and In-Group Bias, with Ad Hominem as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 32 hits. Analysis detected 160 faulty-reasoning hits from 33 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠95% (1,620 of 28,364 speakers). This Ghalibaf is worse (more manipulative) than 94.30% of the peer group.
Ghalibaf
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 33
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

94% percentile
025507510094.3% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos33 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 100.0%100.0%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%120%120%Ad Hominem: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 1.5%Indoctrination: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 0.0%In-Group Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 19.2%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos