Author summary
24% 2 analyzed articles/videos 360 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Matthew Cupelli results contain 21 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Halo Effect , and Anchoring Bias , with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 9% saturation with 165 hits . Analysis detected 927 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,824 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.4% and a BS Rank of 45% (3,467 of 6,275 authors). This Matthew Cupelli is better (less manipulative) than 55.20% of the peer group. Matthew Cupelli
Author details
Total words: 1,824
Article count: 2
Publications
Ranking context Position among analyzed authors
45% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 44.8% percentile 2.4% BS Score2 analyzed articles1.8K 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% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Author 4.3% 4.3% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Author 6.0% 6.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Author 1.9% 1.9% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Author 9.1% 9.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Author 1.7% 1.7% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Author 0.3% 0.3% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Author 3.2% 3.2% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Author 1.6% 1.6% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Author 0.9% 0.9% Post Hoc (False Cause) Sitewide 3.3% 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 4.3%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Author 6.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Author 9.1%, sitewide 15.9% Availability Heuristic: Author 1.9%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Author 3.2%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Author 1.7%, sitewide 7.5% Halo Effect: Author 5.3%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Author 0.3%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Author 1.6%, sitewide 5.3% Overconfidence Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Author 4.5%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Author 3.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 0.4%, sitewide 3.3% Recency Bias: Author 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Indoctrination: Author 2.0%, sitewide 0.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Author 1.3%, sitewide 1.9% Unattributed Quote: Author 0.9%, sitewide 1.1% Special Pleading: Author 1.0%, sitewide 0.3% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.8% Quote-first Misdirection: Author 0.9%, sitewide 0.0% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Author 0.6%, sitewide 0.5% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Author rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst