Speaker summary
⁠84%4 analyzed articles/videos78 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jean Carroll results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Recency Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 38.5% saturation with 30 hits. Analysis detected 97 faulty-reasoning hits from 78 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 17.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠28% (20,455 of 28,364 speakers). This Jean Carroll is better (less manipulative) than 72.10% of the peer group.
Jean Carroll
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

28% percentile
025507510027.9% percentile
17.8% BS Score4 analyzed videos78 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 38.5%38.5%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 19.2%19.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 10.3%10.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 15.4%15.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 19.2%19.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 10.3%10.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 11.5%11.5%

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%Anecdotal: Speaker 38.5%, sitewide 5.2%Negativity Bias: Speaker 15.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 19.2%, sitewide 15.9%Recency Bias: Speaker 19.2%, sitewide 2.7%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 11.5%, sitewide 9.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 10.3%, sitewide 0.8%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 10.3%, sitewide 7.5%AnecdotalSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos