Speaker summary
⁠72%1 analyzed article/video120 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Meghan Peterson results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Negativity Bias, and Hindsight Bias, with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 42.5% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 287.375 faulty-reasoning hits from 120 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 23.5% and a BS Rank of ⁠38% (16,267 of 25,889 speakers). This Meghan Peterson is better (less manipulative) than 62.80% of the peer group.
Meghan Peterson
Speaker details
Total words: 120
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

37% percentile
025507510037.2% percentile
23.5% BS Score1 analyzed videos120 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 42.5%42.5%Hindsight BiasSitewide 1.4%Speaker 32.8%32.8%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 21.9%21.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 31.9%31.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 30.6%30.6%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Speaker 14.4%14.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 5.0%5.0%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Speaker 8.8%8.8%

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%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 42.5%, sitewide 3.7%Hindsight Bias: Speaker 32.8%, sitewide 1.4%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 31.9%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 30.6%, sitewide 19.2%Begging the Question: Speaker 21.9%, sitewide 1.7%Optimism Bias: Speaker 14.4%, sitewide 6.0%Availability Heuristic: Speaker 8.8%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 5.0%, sitewide 7.5%Self-Serving BiasSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos