Speaker summary
⁠57%2 analyzed articles/videos229.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Joel Tickner results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Indoctrination, and Appeal to Emotion, with Burden of Proof as the most egregious example at 27.9% saturation with 96 hits. Analysis detected 441.819 faulty-reasoning hits from 229.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 19.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠31% (19,344 of 27,799 speakers). This Joel Tickner is better (less manipulative) than 69.60% of the peer group.
Joel Tickner
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 229.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

30% percentile
025507510030.4% percentile
19.2% BS Score2 analyzed videos229.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 27.9%27.9%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 30.4%30.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 36.1%36.1%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 22.4%22.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 7.9%7.9%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 11.4%11.4%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 8.3%8.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 13.9%13.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 14.2%14.2%

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%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 36.1%, sitewide 11.1%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 30.4%, sitewide 4.0%Burden of Proof: Speaker 27.9%, sitewide 0.4%Indoctrination: Speaker 22.4%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 7.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 14.2%, sitewide 15.9%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 13.9%, sitewide 9.1%Begging the Question: Speaker 11.4%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Speaker 8.3%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos