Speaker summary
⁠76%1 analyzed article/video56 analyzed words
BS Summary: These James Worrell results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Availability Heuristic, and Bandwagon, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 92.3% saturation with 58.125 hits. Analysis detected 191.25 faulty-reasoning hits from 56 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 45.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠62% (10,824 of 28,364 speakers). This James Worrell is worse (more manipulative) than 61.80% of the peer group.
James Worrell
Speaker details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

62% percentile
025507510061.8% percentile
45.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos56 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 92.3%92.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 51.8%51.8%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.0%50.0%BandwagonSitewide 2.2%Speaker 30.9%30.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 30.9%30.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 15.5%15.5%

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%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 92.3%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 51.8%, sitewide 9.1%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 15.9%Bandwagon: Speaker 30.9%, sitewide 2.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 30.9%, sitewide 6.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 15.5%, sitewide 3.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos