NPR⁠84%

Having a hobby is good for you. Here's how to find one ⁠78%

By Nichole Perkins⁠0% Audrey Nguyen⁠0%

5/15/2021, 4:00:37 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Optimism Bias, and Indoctrination, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 28.4% saturation with 171 hits. Analysis detected 1,251 faulty-reasoning hits from 603 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 69.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (4,909 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.60% of the article peer group.

In the spring of 2020, shortly after the government-mandated lockdowns to help control the spread of coronavirus, I realized I had no hobby. 
Everything had become a hustle. 
As a freelance writer and podcast host, I (Nichole) already pretty much worked from home, but as job opportunities arrived further apart and I had more time on my hands, I knew I needed something more fulfilling in my life. 
I decided to return to an old childhood hobby of cross-stitching. 
My mother had taught me this form of needlecraft, and it made me feel reconnected with her during a time I wasn't sure when I'd see her again. 
It also helped ease the anxiety I was feeling about current events. 
When I sat down with my needle and thread, I was focused on counting out stitches and making sure I had the proper colors of embroidery floss. 
My fears and frustrations quieted, and I found immense pleasure in doing something I knew I'd never monetize. 
Fueled by the joy I felt in doing something just for myself, I reached out to three different people with three very different hobbies to ask them for their advice on how to start a hobby. 
Marc Castañeda is a knitter. 
Kareemah Batts is a rock climber. 
And Thuy Phan creates unique cocktails. 
Using their experiences, here are some tips on how to start a hobby: 
Remember: Hobbies are good for you! 
According to professor Yoshi Iwasaki, chair of Public Health and Recreation at San Jose State University, when we bring meaning to our leisure time, like we can through hobbies, it helps improve our mental health. 
Other benefits include strengthening our sense of connection, identity, and our autonomy. 
Figure out your interests 
Create a short list of three to five activities, including two you've never tried before. 
Phan suggests looking at the patterns of your daily life: "Where do you spend most of your time and energy focused on?" 
Phan is an avid reader, so she makes cocktails based on the books she's read. 
Consider how a new hobby could fit into how you currently spend your time. 
Research 
When you've narrowed your interests down, start collecting information — what are some beginner-friendly projects you could start with? 
What materials will you need? 
How much will they cost? 
You can look online at tutorials and message boards or maybe go into stores that sell the necessary supplies and ask someone more knowledgeable for advice. 
Have no expectations 
Chances are you won't be an expert the first time you try your new hobby. 
You won't be the best at it, but you also won't be the worst. 
Castañeda says, "The biggest advice I learned was just being patient with myself. 
I think I just thought I would be good at a craft I picked up, like instantly." 
Allow yourself room to grow, and when you finally reach the goal level you have in mind, you can look back and be proud of the progress you've made. 
Give yourself permission to fail and to take breaks 
Becoming frustrated with learning something new is part of the process, so it's okay to take a step back to take a breather. 
"I think people think that if you have an interest or a hobby...you should always feel 150% for it. 
And it's actually OK to step back, you know, so that you can remind yourself why you're in love with it," Batts says. 
Once you've moved through each of these steps, you're ready to go. 
Good luck and happy hobbying! 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 10.6%Nichole Perkins: 5.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.4%Confirmation Bias10.6%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.9%Nichole Perkins: 4.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.8%Availability Heuristic13.9%This article: 2.5%Nichole Perkins: 3.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic2.5%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 3.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Nichole Perkins: 3.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.4%Overconfidence Bias2.0%This article: 2.2%Nichole Perkins: 8.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 11.1%Framing Effect2.2%This article: 0.8%Nichole Perkins: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Loss Aversion0.8%This article: 2.5%Nichole Perkins: 1.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Status Quo Bias2.5%This article: 6.6%Nichole Perkins: 1.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect6.6%This article: 15.9%Nichole Perkins: 9.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.4%Optimism Bias15.9%This article: 0.5%Nichole Perkins: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%Pessimism Bias0.5%This article: 4.3%Nichole Perkins: 2.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 11.3%Negativity Bias4.3%This article: 6.6%Nichole Perkins: 6.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%Self-Serving Bias6.6%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 2.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 1.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 2.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.7%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 1.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.1%Nichole Perkins: 11.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 6.1%Appeal to Authority13.1%This article: 5.0%Nichole Perkins: 1.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.5%False Dilemma5.0%This article: 3.8%Nichole Perkins: 0.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.3%Slippery Slope3.8%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.3%Nichole Perkins: 5.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 4.4%Hasty Generalization9.3%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 22.1%Nichole Perkins: 9.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 6.6%Appeal to Emotion22.1%This article: 1.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.9%Begging the Question1.0%This article: 28.4%Nichole Perkins: 6.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)28.4%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.1%Nichole Perkins: 12.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Anecdotal10.1%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.6%Nichole Perkins: 0.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.6%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.3%Nichole Perkins: 1.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Middle Ground2.3%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.3%Nichole Perkins: 1.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.3%Unattributed Quote5.3%This article: 8.1%Nichole Perkins: 2.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection8.1%This article: 8.0%Nichole Perkins: 1.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.1%Biased Writer Voice8.0%This article: 14.6%Nichole Perkins: 12.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.0%Indoctrination14.6%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nichole Perkins: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Nichole Perkins: 1.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.3%

603 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers27%attributed speech442writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageMarc Castañeda • 5 words • 0.0% coverageKareemah Batts • 6 words • 0.0% coverageThuy Phan • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageSan Jose State University • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageThuy Phan • 22 words • 0.0% coverageThuy Phan • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageMarc Castañeda • 13 words • 100.0% coverageMarc Castañeda • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageKareemah Batts • 19 words • 100.0% coverageKareemah Batts • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
35 attributed words22% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Indoctrination-19.9 ptsWriter: 19.9%San Jose State University: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.9 ptsWriter: 10.9%San Jose State University: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.9 ptsWriter: 5.9%San Jose State University: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-2.9 ptsWriter: 2.9%San Jose State University: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.