Author summary
0% 2 analyzed articles/videos 729 analyzed words
BS Summary: These David Matthews results contain 34 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect , Appeal to Emotion , and Hasty Generalization , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 24.3% saturation with 689 hits . Analysis detected 3,977 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,841 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.1% and a BS Rank of 77% (1,587 of 6,628 authors). This David Matthews is worse (more manipulative) than 76.10% of the peer group. David Matthews
Author details
Total words: 2,841
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
76% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 76.1% percentile 4.1% BS Score2 analyzed articles2.8K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 24.3% 24.3% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 14.9% 14.9% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 10.3% 10.3% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Author 2.4% 2.4% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 1.2% 1.2% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 11.9% 11.9% Anchoring Bias Sitewide 4.0% Author 0.8% 0.8% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 1.5% 1.5% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Author 3.8% 3.8% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias Sitewide 3.1% Author 0.4% 0.4% 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% Framing Effect: Author 14.9%, sitewide 26.9% Biased Writer Voice: Author 24.3%, sitewide 5.3% Negativity Bias: Author 10.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 14.6%, sitewide 15.9% Hasty Generalization: Author 11.9%, sitewide 8.1% Appeal to Authority: Author 2.4%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Author 8.9%, sitewide 9.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 6.4%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 6.9%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 1.2%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Author 4.2%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Author 1.5%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 0.8%, sitewide 4.0% Unattributed Quote: Author 3.8%, sitewide 1.1% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 2.5%, sitewide 3.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 3.2%, sitewide 0.8% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.2%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Author 2.2%, sitewide 2.7% Pessimism Bias: Author 2.5%, sitewide 1.9% False Dilemma: Author 2.3%, sitewide 1.5% Bandwagon: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Author 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 1.8%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst