Author summary
0%1 analyzed article/video583 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Matt Sedensky results contain 27 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Anecdotal, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 18.6% saturation with 433 hits. Analysis detected 3,160 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,332 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 5% and a BS Rank of 84% (1,120 of 6,628 authors). This Matt Sedensky is worse (more manipulative) than 83.10% of the peer group.
Matt Sedensky
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
0%Vivek Chibber1%
0%Sneha Dey1%
0%Ideastream Public Media1%
0%Jacob Owens1%
1%Megan Fan Munce1%
84%Matt Sedensky (selected)6%
100%Greg Rosenstein38%
100%Siham Shamalakh43%
100%Greg Miller54%
100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 2,332
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

83% percentile
025507510083.1% percentile
5.0% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.3K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Author 5.1%5.1%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Author 14.2%14.2%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 18.6%18.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 8.6%8.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Author 0.9%0.9%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 2.7%2.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 9.3%9.3%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Author 0.9%0.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 15.5%15.5%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Author 5.4%5.4%

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 18.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Author 15.5%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Author 5.1%, sitewide 15.9%Anecdotal: Author 14.2%, sitewide 5.2%Appeal to Authority: Author 9.9%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Author 9.6%, sitewide 9.1%Biased Writer Voice: Author 9.3%, sitewide 5.3%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 8.6%, sitewide 3.3%Hasty Generalization: Author 7.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Author 2.7%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 6.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 5.4%, sitewide 2.0%Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 4.0%Pessimism Bias: Author 3.9%, sitewide 1.9%Self-Serving Bias: Author 2.3%, sitewide 3.7%Unattributed Quote: Author 3.4%, sitewide 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Author 3.3%, sitewide 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error: Author 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Author 2.1%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Author 0.8%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Author 1.5%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Author 0.3%, sitewide 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 1.5%, sitewide 0.8%Framing EffectSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos