Publication summary
51% 14 analyzed articles/videos 7,336 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Austin Chronicle results contain 50 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias , Appeal to Emotion , and Halo Effect , with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 9.7% saturation with 3,407 hits . Analysis detected 26,043 faulty-reasoning hits from 35,145 analyzed words across 14 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 32% (283 of 410 publications). This Austin Chronicle is better (less manipulative) than 68.90% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 35,145
Article count: 14
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
31% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 31.1% percentile 1.5% BS Score14 analyzed articles35.1K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Publication 4.7% 4.7% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 6.3% 6.3% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 5.4% 5.4% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 3.0% 3.0% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 1.8% 1.8% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.5% 1.5% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 2.8% 2.8% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 3.4% 3.4% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 9.7% 9.7% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Publication 1.2% 1.2% 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% Framing Effect: Publication 4.7%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 6.3%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 5.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 11.1% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 9.7%, sitewide 5.3% Availability Heuristic: Publication 1.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 2.8%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 4.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 4.0%, sitewide 6.0% Anecdotal: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.0% Representativeness Heuristic: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 1.9% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst