Speaker summary
⁠75%1 analyzed article/video271 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Jase Robertson results contain 25 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Begging the Question, and Fundamental Attribution Error, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 33.5% saturation with 101.249 hits. Analysis detected 614.422 faulty-reasoning hits from 271 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 7.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠7% (42,001 of 45,145 speakers). This Jase Robertson is better (less manipulative) than 93.00% of the peer group.
Jase Robertson
Speaker ranking list
PercentileSpeakerBS Score
⁠0%Paul Heideman1%
⁠0%The Brookings Institution1%
⁠0%Conor Heffernan1%
⁠0%Gen Jack Keane1%
⁠0%Katy Longshore1%
⁠7%Jase Robertson (selected)8%
⁠100%291 Brewhouse100%
⁠100%21 Grams100%
⁠100%2035 Initiative100%
⁠100%1X representative100%
⁠100%1455 Storytelling Arts100%
Speaker details
Total words: 271
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

7% percentile
02550751007.0% percentile
7.2% BS Score1 analyzed videos271 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 33.5%33.5%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 2.6%2.6%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 18.3%18.3%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 13.5%13.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 7.9%7.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 1.7%1.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 11.7%11.7%Fundamental Attribution E…Sitewide 2.7%Speaker 9.1%9.1%Dunning-Kruger EffectSitewide 0.1%Speaker 6.3%6.3%Burden of ProofSitewide 0.4%Speaker 5.5%5.5%

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 33.5%, sitewide 7.5%Framing Effect: Speaker 2.6%, sitewide 26.9%Indoctrination: Speaker 18.3%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 7.9%, sitewide 15.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 13.5%, sitewide 1.7%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 11.7%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 8.2%, sitewide 11.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Speaker 9.1%, sitewide 2.7%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 1.7%, sitewide 9.1%In-Group Bias: Speaker 8.4%, sitewide 6.9%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 3.5%, sitewide 8.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect: Speaker 6.3%, sitewide 0.1%Optimism Bias: Speaker 3.1%, sitewide 6.0%False Dilemma: Speaker 5.8%, sitewide 1.5%Burden of Proof: Speaker 5.5%, sitewide 0.4%Special Pleading: Speaker 5.3%, sitewide 0.3%Anecdotal: Speaker 1.7%, sitewide 5.2%Straw Man: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 0.9%Appeal to Nature: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias: Speaker 4.8%, sitewide 0.2%Ad Hominem: Speaker 4.6%, sitewide 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 4.6%, sitewide 3.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 3.6%, sitewide 0.8%Personal Incredulity: Speaker 3.6%, sitewide 0.2%Confirmation BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos