The science behind Frankly

Reading list

Frankly's read isn't a hunch. It stands on decades of research — and a fast-growing science — of how language is used to persuade, evade, and manipulate. Here's the shelf, the studies, and the talks it's built on.

Books
On bullshit and detecting it
  • Harry FrankfurtOn Bullshit (2005)

    The tiny, famous book that separates the liar (who hides the truth) from the bullshitter (who just doesn't care what's true). Frankly is built on this one distinction.

  • John PetrocelliThe Life-Changing Science of Detecting Bullshit (2021)

    A psychologist's practical, evidence-based toolkit for spotting the red flags — buzzwords, emotional language, confident vagueness.

  • Carl SaganThe Demon-Haunted World (1995)

    Contains the beloved “Baloney Detection Kit” — the original skeptic's checklist for testing any claim.

On evasive and institutional language
  • William LutzDoublespeak (1989)

    The definitive book on language that pretends to communicate — corporate and political euphemism, dissected.

  • George Orwell“Politics and the English Language” (1946)

    The classic essay on how vagueness hides meaning and dodges responsibility. Public domain, five-minute read, still devastating.

On persuasion, power, and belief
  • Robert CialdiniInfluence (1984) & Pre-Suasion (2016)

    The definitive work on the levers that make people say yes — the same levers behind manufactured urgency and false consensus.

  • Daniel KahnemanThinking, Fast and Slow (2011)

    Why a fast brain accepts impressive nonsense without checking it — the mechanism under the fog.

  • Deborah TannenTalking from 9 to 5 (1994)

    How workplace talk quietly encodes power and status.

  • Amanda MontellCultish (2021)

    A sharp, modern look at how language creates belonging and pressure — from cults to companies to “we're a family here.”

On manipulation in relationships
  • Robin SternThe Gaslight Effect (2007)

    The book that named gaslighting for everyday life.

  • Susan ForwardEmotional Blackmail (1997)

    The Fear–Obligation–Guilt levers behind guilt-trips and ultimatums.

  • Lundy BancroftWhy Does He Do That? (2002)

    Reframes controlling behavior as entitlement, not temper.

  • George SimonIn Sheep's Clothing (1996)

    A field guide to covert-aggression tactics.

  • Evan StarkCoercive Control (2007)

    The landmark work redefining abuse as a pattern, not an incident.

Studies & papers
  • Pennycook et al.“On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit” (2015)

    Proved, experimentally, that buzzword-salad gets rated as profound. Free to read in Judgment and Decision Making.

  • Littrell, Risko & Fugelsang“The Bullshitting Frequency Scale” (2021)

    Separates persuasive bullshitting (to impress) from evasive bullshitting (to dodge) — the two flavors Frankly catches. In British Journal of Social Psychology.

  • The Corporate Bullshit Receptivity Scale(2026)

    A validated measure of how susceptible people are to workplace BS — and how that susceptibility links to poorer decisions. The most Frankly-shaped study there is.

  • Freyd; Harsey et al.DARVO (1997; 2017)

    The origin of DARVO, and the experiment showing it makes people doubt the real victim.

  • Paige Sweet“The Sociology of Gaslighting” (2019)

    Reframed gaslighting as a power phenomenon. In American Sociological Review.

Talks & watch
  • Pamela Meyer“How to Spot a Liar” (TEDGlobal, 2011)

    One of the most-viewed TED talks ever (30M+) on the tells of deception.

  • John PetrocelliTEDx Talk on detecting bullshit

    The viral talk that became his book — a great 15-minute primer.

  • Jennifer FreydTalks on DARVO and betrayal trauma (via jjfreyd.com)

    Accessible explanations straight from the researcher who named the pattern.

How to read this responsibly

Frankly points to patterns these researchers documented — it doesn't diagnose anyone. The scientists are careful here, and so are we: a tactic in one message is something to notice and ask about, not proof of someone's character or the state of a relationship. Use it to think more clearly, not to convict.