Speaker summary
⁠80%1 analyzed article/video79.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Justin Schultz results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Halo Effect, and Unattributed Quote, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 52.8% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 200.125 faulty-reasoning hits from 79.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 25.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠41% (16,165 of 27,299 speakers). This Justin Schultz is better (less manipulative) than 59.20% of the peer group.
Justin Schultz
Speaker details
Total words: 79.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

41% percentile
025507510040.8% percentile
25.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos79.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 52.8%52.8%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 47.2%47.2%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 35.4%35.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 31.1%31.1%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 26.4%26.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 12.7%12.7%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 5.7%5.7%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 5.7%5.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 9.9%9.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 52.8%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 47.2%, sitewide 11.1%Halo Effect: Speaker 35.4%, sitewide 6.7%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 31.1%, sitewide 4.6%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 26.4%, sitewide 1.1%Optimism Bias: Speaker 12.7%, sitewide 6.0%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 9.9%, sitewide 8.1%Begging the Question: Speaker 5.7%, sitewide 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 5.7%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos