Speaker summary
⁠51%1 analyzed article/video274.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Julia Roberts results contain 16 faulty reasoning types, including Status Quo Bias, Anecdotal, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 16.5% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 584.125 faulty-reasoning hits from 274.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 9.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠11% (25,366 of 28,364 speakers). This Julia Roberts is better (less manipulative) than 89.40% of the peer group.
Julia Roberts
Speaker details
Total words: 274.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

11% percentile
025507510010.6% percentile
9.6% BS Score1 analyzed videos274.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–25%
0.0%5%10%15%20%25%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 0.7%0.7%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 14.1%14.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 13.3%13.3%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 16.5%16.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 13.3%13.3%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 10.2%10.2%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 13.8%13.8%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 9.2%9.2%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 12.4%12.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 8.0%8.0%

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 0.7%, sitewide 19.2%Halo Effect: Speaker 16.5%, sitewide 6.7%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 13.1%, sitewide 15.9%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 14.1%, sitewide 2.2%Anecdotal: Speaker 13.8%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 13.3%, sitewide 3.3%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 13.3%, sitewide 3.7%Optimism Bias: Speaker 12.4%, sitewide 6.0%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 10.2%, sitewide 1.4%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 9.9%, sitewide 7.5%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 9.2%, sitewide 1.1%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 8.1%, sitewide 8.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 8.0%, sitewide 4.6%In-Group Bias: Speaker 6.5%, sitewide 6.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 3.9%, sitewide 0.8%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 0.7%, sitewide 1.9%Negativity BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos