Speaker summary
⁠59%1 analyzed article/video148 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sang Hea Kil results contain 7 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Self-Serving Bias, and Fundamental Attribution Error, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 52.4% saturation with 97 hits. Analysis detected 245.492 faulty-reasoning hits from 148 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 23.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠38% (17,783 of 28,364 speakers). This Sang Hea Kil is better (less manipulative) than 62.70% of the peer group.
Sang Hea Kil
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 148
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

37% percentile
025507510037.3% percentile
23.1% BS Score1 analyzed videos148 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 52.4%52.4%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 34.8%34.8%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 25.8%25.8%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 11.3%11.3%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 18.3%18.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 9.7%9.7%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 9.2%9.2%

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 52.4%, sitewide 15.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 34.8%, sitewide 8.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 11.3%, sitewide 26.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 25.8%, sitewide 2.7%Negativity Bias: Speaker 9.7%, sitewide 19.2%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 18.3%, sitewide 3.7%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 9.2%, sitewide 1.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos