Speaker summary
⁠67%1 analyzed article/video66.667 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Matthew Litt results contain 6 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Loss Aversion, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 80.5% saturation with 60.375 hits. Analysis detected 166.375 faulty-reasoning hits from 66.667 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 31.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (14,485 of 28,364 speakers). This Matthew Litt is better (less manipulative) than 51.10% of the peer group.
Matthew Litt
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 66.667
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

49% percentile
025507510048.9% percentile
31.1% BS Score1 analyzed videos66.7 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 80.5%80.5%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 28.0%28.0%Loss AversionSitewide 2.5%Speaker 28.0%28.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 28.0%28.0%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 17.0%17.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 5.0%5.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 80.5%, sitewide 15.9%Anecdotal: Speaker 28.0%, sitewide 5.2%Loss Aversion: Speaker 28.0%, sitewide 2.5%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 28.0%, sitewide 0.0%Negativity Bias: Speaker 17.0%, sitewide 19.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 6.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos