Speaker summary
⁠77%1 analyzed article/video175.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Matthew Burrows results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Appeal to Emotion, and Begging the Question, with False Dilemma as the most egregious example at 43.2% saturation with 75.75 hits. Analysis detected 304.75 faulty-reasoning hits from 175.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 16.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠26% (21,070 of 28,364 speakers). This Matthew Burrows is better (less manipulative) than 74.30% of the peer group.
Matthew Burrows
Speaker details
Total words: 175.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

26% percentile
025507510025.7% percentile
16.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos175.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 43.2%43.2%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 17.9%17.9%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 16.2%16.2%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 14.1%14.1%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 14.1%14.1%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Speaker 10.7%10.7%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 9.0%9.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 14.1%14.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 10.7%10.7%

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%False Dilemma: Speaker 43.2%, sitewide 1.5%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 17.9%, sitewide 4.0%Loss Aversion: Speaker 16.2%, sitewide 2.5%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 14.1%, sitewide 15.9%Begging the Question: Speaker 14.1%, sitewide 1.7%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 14.1%, sitewide 3.7%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 11.1%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 10.7%, sitewide 1.9%Optimism Bias: Speaker 9.0%, sitewide 6.0%False DilemmaSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos