Speaker summary
⁠82%1 analyzed article/video123 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tim Callen results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Biased Writer Voice, and Confirmation Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 67.7% saturation with 159 hits. Analysis detected 563.082 faulty-reasoning hits from 123 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 32.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (13,938 of 28,364 speakers). This Tim Callen is worse (more manipulative) than 50.90% of the peer group.
Tim Callen
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 123
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

51% percentile
025507510050.9% percentile
32.8% BS Score1 analyzed videos123 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 67.7%67.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 58.4%58.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 44.1%44.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 39.3%39.3%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 28.5%28.5%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 19.6%19.6%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 8.9%8.9%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Speaker 19.6%19.6%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 8.9%8.9%

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 67.7%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 58.4%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 44.1%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Speaker 39.3%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 28.5%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Speaker 8.9%, sitewide 26.9%Halo Effect: Speaker 19.6%, sitewide 6.7%Indoctrination: Speaker 19.6%, sitewide 0.0%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 8.9%, sitewide 8.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos