Waltham police searching for girl, 17, missing since July 3 7%

By Audrey Cooney3%

7/14/2026, 3:14:30 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 4 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Indoctrination, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 37.6% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 139 faulty-reasoning hits from 149 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 23.3% and a BS Rank of 7% (20,416 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 93.30% of the article peer group.

Waltham police are asking for the public’s help in finding a teen girl who was last seen more than a week ago. 
Victoria “Tori” Amore, 17, was last seen leaving her home on Lexington Street at 11:19 p.m. 
Friday, July 3, the Waltham Police Department said in a Facebook post. 
She was last seen getting into a “dark sedan of an unknown make or model,” the department wrote. 
Amore has a severe food allergy and asthma and did not bring an EpiPen or inhaler with her when she left her home, police said. 
She also suffers from seizures, according to the department. 
The teen frequently puts her hair in “box braids or smaller braids slicked back” and likes to wear heavy makeup, police wrote. 
Anyone with information about Amore’s whereabouts should call Waltham police at 781-314-3600, the department said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 2.7%Boston.com: 2.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.9%Boston.com: 1.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.7%Boston.com: 3.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 4.0%Boston.com: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 4.4%Boston.com: 5.7%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 1.3%Boston.com: 2.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 22.8%Audrey Cooney: 6.8%Boston.com: 6.2%Negativity Bias22.8%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 1.0%Boston.com: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 1.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 1.9%Boston.com: 3.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.6%Boston.com: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 2.3%Boston.com: 3.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 22.8%Audrey Cooney: 3.1%Boston.com: 6.2%Appeal to Emotion22.8%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.9%Boston.com: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.9%Boston.com: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 37.6%Audrey Cooney: 3.1%Boston.com: 1.3%Unattributed Quote37.6%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 1.6%Boston.com: 3.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 10.1%Audrey Cooney: 2.0%Boston.com: 1.3%Indoctrination10.1%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Audrey Cooney: 1.1%Boston.com: 2.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

149 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers89%attributed speech16writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Waltham police • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWaltham police • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWaltham Police Department • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWaltham Police Department • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWaltham police • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWaltham Police Department • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWaltham police • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWaltham Police Department • 15 words • 100.0% coverage
78%flagged-word coverage
54 attributed words41% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-66.7 ptsWriter: 100.0%Waltham Police Department: 33.3%33.3%Indoctrination+27.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Waltham Police Department: 27.8%27.8%

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.