Speaker summary
⁠45%2 analyzed articles/videos43.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Julie results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Burden of Proof, and Negativity Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 89.2% saturation with 91 hits. Analysis detected 386 faulty-reasoning hits from 43.333 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 42% and a BS Rank of ⁠60% (11,407 of 28,364 speakers). This Julie is worse (more manipulative) than 59.80% of the peer group.
Julie
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 43.333
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

60% percentile
025507510059.8% percentile
42.0% BS Score2 analyzed videos43.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 89.2%89.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 62.8%62.8%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 52.9%52.9%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 52.9%52.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 52.9%52.9%Attempt to Sell a Product…Sitewide 0.5%Speaker 33.3%33.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 20.6%20.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 10.8%10.8%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 2.9%2.9%

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%Anecdotal: Speaker 89.2%, sitewide 5.2%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 62.8%, sitewide 9.1%Burden of Proof: Speaker 52.9%, sitewide 0.4%Negativity Bias: Speaker 52.9%, sitewide 19.2%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 52.9%, sitewide 1.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Speaker 33.3%, sitewide 0.5%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Speaker 10.8%, sitewide 6.0%Halo Effect: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 6.7%AnecdotalSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos