Speaker summary
⁠66%1 analyzed article/video113.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Paolo Pozzilli results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Representativeness Heuristic, and Overconfidence Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 70.6% saturation with 120 hits. Analysis detected 412.5 faulty-reasoning hits from 113.333 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 33.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠53% (13,501 of 28,364 speakers). This Paolo Pozzilli is worse (more manipulative) than 52.40% of the peer group.
Paolo Pozzilli
Speaker details
Total words: 113.333
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

52% percentile
025507510052.4% percentile
33.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos113.3 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 70.6%70.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 50.0%50.0%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 41.2%41.2%Representativeness Heuris…Sitewide 1.9%Speaker 29.4%29.4%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 29.4%29.4%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 20.6%20.6%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 20.6%20.6%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 8.8%8.8%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 70.6%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 50.0%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 41.2%, sitewide 7.5%Representativeness Heuristic: Speaker 29.4%, sitewide 1.9%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 29.4%, sitewide 4.6%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 9.1%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 20.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Speaker 8.8%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos