Speaker summary
⁠39%1 analyzed article/video186.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jonathan Jay results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Fundamental Attribution Error, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Anecdotal, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 25.4% saturation with 71 hits. Analysis detected 232.375 faulty-reasoning hits from 186.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 14.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠21% (22,488 of 28,364 speakers). This Jonathan Jay is better (less manipulative) than 79.30% of the peer group.
Jonathan Jay
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 186.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

21% percentile
025507510020.7% percentile
14.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos186.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 22.5%22.5%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 25.4%25.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 10.7%10.7%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 8.9%8.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 10.2%10.2%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 7.9%7.9%

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 25.4%, sitewide 11.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 22.5%, sitewide 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 0.8%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 10.2%, sitewide 7.5%Anecdotal: Speaker 8.9%, sitewide 5.2%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 7.9%, sitewide 8.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos