Speaker summary
⁠83%3 analyzed articles/videos94.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These John James results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including No True Scotsman, Ad Hominem, and In-Group Bias, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 43.5% saturation with 73 hits. Analysis detected 337.865 faulty-reasoning hits from 94.333 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 50.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠71% (8,225 of 28,364 speakers). This John James is worse (more manipulative) than 71.00% of the peer group.
John James
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 94.333
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

71% percentile
025507510071.0% percentile
50.5% BS Score3 analyzed videos94.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%No True ScotsmanSitewide 0.1%Speaker 88.5%88.5%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 76.9%76.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 76.9%76.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 43.5%43.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 29.8%29.8%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 14.9%14.9%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 23.2%23.2%

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%No True Scotsman: Speaker 88.5%, sitewide 0.1%Ad Hominem: Speaker 76.9%, sitewide 2.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 76.9%, sitewide 6.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 43.5%, sitewide 8.1%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 29.8%, sitewide 3.7%Framing Effect: Speaker 23.2%, sitewide 26.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 14.9%, sitewide 2.7%No True ScotsmanSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos