Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video72 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Nic Allen results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Negativity Bias, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 81 hits. Analysis detected 297 faulty-reasoning hits from 72 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 70% and a BS Rank of ⁠80% (5,863 of 28,364 speakers). This Nic Allen is worse (more manipulative) than 79.30% of the peer group.
Nic Allen
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 72
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

79% percentile
025507510079.3% percentile
70.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos72 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 100.0%100.0%No True ScotsmanSitewide 0.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 50.0%50.0%

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%120%120%Halo Effect: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 6.7%Anecdotal: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 5.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.8%Negativity Bias: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 19.2%No True Scotsman: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 0.1%Halo EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos