Speaker summary
⁠72%1 analyzed article/video80 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Worrell results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Primacy Effect, and Recency Bias, with Ad Hominem as the most egregious example at 36.3% saturation with 29 hits. Analysis detected 158 faulty-reasoning hits from 80 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 32.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (13,902 of 28,364 speakers). This Worrell is worse (more manipulative) than 51.00% of the peer group.
Worrell
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 80
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

51% percentile
025507510051.0% percentile
32.9% BS Score1 analyzed videos80 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Primacy EffectSitewide 0.9%Speaker 36.3%36.3%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 36.3%36.3%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Speaker 36.3%36.3%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 26.3%26.3%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 26.3%26.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 36.3%36.3%

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%Ad Hominem: Speaker 36.3%, sitewide 2.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 36.3%, sitewide 15.9%Primacy Effect: Speaker 36.3%, sitewide 0.9%Recency Bias: Speaker 36.3%, sitewide 2.7%Slippery Slope: Speaker 26.3%, sitewide 1.7%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 26.3%, sitewide 2.2%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos