Speaker summary
⁠50%1 analyzed article/video149.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Nick Erickson results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Anchoring Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 43.1% saturation with 63.816 hits. Analysis detected 204.816 faulty-reasoning hits from 149.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 27.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠45% (15,719 of 28,364 speakers). This Nick Erickson is better (less manipulative) than 55.40% of the peer group.
Nick Erickson
Speaker details
Total words: 149.667
Article count: 1
Authors
?

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

45% percentile
025507510044.6% percentile
27.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos149.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 43.1%43.1%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 28.0%28.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 26.8%26.8%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 20.3%20.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 20.3%20.3%

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%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 43.1%, sitewide 7.5%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 28.0%, sitewide 4.0%Anecdotal: Speaker 26.8%, sitewide 5.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 20.3%, sitewide 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 20.3%, sitewide 3.3%Confirmation BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos