Speaker summary
⁠40%2 analyzed articles/videos226.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Juan Edghill results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 17.2% saturation with 58 hits. Analysis detected 239 faulty-reasoning hits from 226.5 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 9.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠12% (25,183 of 28,364 speakers). This Juan Edghill is better (less manipulative) than 88.80% of the peer group.
Juan Edghill
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 226.5
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

11% percentile
025507510011.2% percentile
9.9% BS Score2 analyzed videos226.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Horn EffectSitewide 1.0%Speaker 13.0%13.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 7.4%7.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 4.7%4.7%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 4.7%4.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 8.6%8.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 17.2%17.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 17.2%17.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 6.5%6.5%

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%Negativity Bias: Speaker 17.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 17.2%, sitewide 15.9%Horn Effect: Speaker 13.0%, sitewide 1.0%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 11.1%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 8.6%, sitewide 5.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 7.4%, sitewide 0.8%Optimism Bias: Speaker 6.5%, sitewide 6.0%Indoctrination: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos