Speaker summary
⁠58%3 analyzed articles/videos362.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Ken Houston results contain 24 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Anecdotal, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 15.7% saturation with 73.6 hits. Analysis detected 770.936 faulty-reasoning hits from 362.333 analyzed words across 3 articles, generating a BS Score of 6.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (27,182 of 28,364 speakers). This Ken Houston is better (less manipulative) than 95.80% of the peer group.
Ken Houston
Speaker details
Total words: 362.333
Article count: 3
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

4% percentile
02550751004.2% percentile
6.2% BS Score3 analyzed videos362.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 3.3%3.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 3.2%3.2%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 14.1%14.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 5.5%5.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 15.7%15.7%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 9.3%9.3%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 8.5%8.5%Appeal to NatureSitewide 0.2%Speaker 7.0%7.0%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 1.8%1.8%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 7.5%7.5%

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%Framing Effect: Speaker 3.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 3.2%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 5.5%, sitewide 15.9%Halo Effect: Speaker 15.7%, sitewide 6.7%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 14.1%, sitewide 3.7%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 10.2%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 6.0%Straw Man: Speaker 9.3%, sitewide 0.9%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 8.5%, sitewide 1.4%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 8.2%, sitewide 5.3%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 1.8%, sitewide 8.1%Ad Hominem: Speaker 7.5%, sitewide 2.2%Anecdotal: Speaker 7.2%, sitewide 5.2%Appeal to Nature: Speaker 7.0%, sitewide 0.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 6.9%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 6.3%, sitewide 3.3%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 6.1%, sitewide 4.6%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 4.5%, sitewide 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 4.0%, sitewide 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 3.9%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 1.5%Loss Aversion: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 2.5%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 1.8%, sitewide 1.9%Special Pleading: Speaker 1.5%, sitewide 0.3%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos