Speaker summary
⁠80%1 analyzed article/video87 analyzed words
BS Summary: These John Curran results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Politically Right Leaning Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 59.4% saturation with 85 hits. Analysis detected 342.117 faulty-reasoning hits from 87 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 40.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠59% (11,668 of 28,364 speakers). This John Curran is worse (more manipulative) than 58.90% of the peer group.
John Curran
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 87
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

59% percentile
025507510058.9% percentile
40.9% BS Score1 analyzed videos87 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 59.4%59.4%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 52.5%52.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 45.8%45.8%Politically Right Leaning…Sitewide 1.4%Speaker 35.7%35.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 49.5%49.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 40.6%40.6%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 21.7%21.7%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 21.7%21.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 59.4%, sitewide 3.3%False Dilemma: Speaker 52.5%, sitewide 1.5%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 49.5%, sitewide 15.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 45.8%, sitewide 8.1%Negativity Bias: Speaker 40.6%, sitewide 19.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias: Speaker 35.7%, sitewide 1.4%Burden of Proof: Speaker 21.7%, sitewide 0.4%Loss Aversion: Speaker 21.7%, sitewide 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos