Author summary
⁠100%1 analyzed article/video63 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Sarah Matthews results contain 12 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Left Leaning Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Framing Effect, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 77.4% saturation with 195 hits. Analysis detected 888 faulty-reasoning hits from 252 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 29.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠100% (18 of 8,522 authors). This Sarah Matthews is worse (more manipulative) than 99.80% of the peer group.
Sarah Matthews
Author ranking list
PercentileAuthorBS Score
⁠0%Hannah Martin1%
⁠0%Paul DeMark1%
⁠0%Emma Sedlak1%
⁠0%Michael Fox1%
⁠0%San Antonio Report Staff1%
⁠100%Sarah Matthews (selected)30%
⁠100%Greg Rosenstein38%
⁠100%Siham Shamalakh43%
⁠100%Greg Miller54%
⁠100%Kevin Kniestedt60%
⁠100%Bill Radke60%
Author details
Total words: 252
Article count: 1
Publications

Ranking context

Position among analyzed authors

100% percentile
025507510099.8% percentile
29.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles252 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

AuthorSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Author 75.0%75.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Author 67.5%67.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Author 77.4%77.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Author 65.1%65.1%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Author 12.7%12.7%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Author 12.7%12.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Author 12.3%12.3%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Author 9.9%9.9%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Author 2.4%2.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Author 12.7%12.7%

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%Negativity Bias: Author 77.4%, sitewide 19.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Author 75.0%, sitewide 2.0%Biased Writer Voice: Author 67.5%, sitewide 5.3%Framing Effect: Author 65.1%, sitewide 26.9%Confirmation Bias: Author 12.7%, sitewide 7.5%False Dilemma: Author 12.7%, sitewide 1.5%Indoctrination: Author 12.7%, sitewide 0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Author 12.3%, sitewide 3.3%Recency Bias: Author 9.9%, sitewide 2.7%Hasty Generalization: Author 2.4%, sitewide 8.1%Ad Hominem: Author 2.4%, sitewide 2.2%Horn Effect: Author 2.4%, sitewide 1.0%Negativity BiasSitewide rateAuthor rate

Analyzed articles and videos