Speaker summary
⁠33%3 analyzed articles/videos114.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These International Criminal Court results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Confirmation Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 42.8% saturation with 83 hits. Analysis detected 278 faulty-reasoning hits from 114.333 analyzed words across 3 articles and videos, generating a BS Score of 23.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠39% (17,450 of 28,364 speakers). This International Criminal Court is better (less manipulative) than 61.50% of the peer group.
International Criminal Court
Speaker details
Total words: 114.333
Content count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

39% percentile
025507510038.5% percentile
23.9% BS Score3 analyzed videos114.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 42.8%42.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 37.6%37.6%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 19.6%19.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 14.4%14.4%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 14.4%14.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 14.4%14.4%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 42.8%, sitewide 1.1%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 37.6%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 19.6%, sitewide 7.5%Negativity Bias: Speaker 14.4%, sitewide 19.2%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 14.4%, sitewide 9.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 14.4%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed QuoteSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos