Speaker summary
ā 29%1 analyzed article/video143.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These John Chisholm results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Hasty Generalization, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 14.5% saturation with 38 hits. Analysis detected 108 faulty-reasoning hits from 143.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 10.3% and a BS Rank of ā 12% (24,950 of 28,364 speakers). This John Chisholm is better (less manipulative) than 88.00% of the peer group.
John Chisholm
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
ā 0%The Brookings Institution1%
ā 0%Gen Jack Keane1%
ā 0%Shahryar Yadegar1%
ā 0%Mike Muse1%
ā 0%Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc.1%
ā 12%John Chisholm (selected)11%
ā 100%4MATIV100%
ā 100%42nd Avenue and High Street I-880 access improvement project page100%
ā 100%314 Action Fund100%
ā 100%21 Grams100%
ā 100%1X representative100%
Speaker details
Total words: 143.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

12% percentile
025507510012.0% percentile
10.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos143.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0ā€“25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 14.5%14.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 10.7%10.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 5.3%5.3%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 10.7%10.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%5%5%10%10%15%15%20%20%25%25%Anecdotal: Speaker 14.5%, sitewide 5.2%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 11.1%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 3.3%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 5.3%, sitewide 8.1%AnecdotalSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos