Publication summary
22% 4 analyzed articles/videos 3,847 analyzed words
BS Summary: These NYS Focus results contain 42 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority , Optimism Bias , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 5.4% saturation with 895 hits . Analysis detected 8,620 faulty-reasoning hits from 16,713 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.2% and a BS Rank of 16% (348 of 410 publications). This NYS Focus is better (less manipulative) than 84.80% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 16,713
Article count: 4
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
15% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 15.2% percentile 1.2% BS Score4 analyzed articles16.7K 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 3.6% 3.6% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 5.4% 5.4% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 3.1% 3.1% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.1% 2.1% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 0.7% 0.7% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 4.5% 4.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 0.6% 0.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 1.8% 1.8% Biased Writer Voice Sitewide 5.3% Publication 0.4% 0.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 3.4% 3.4% 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 3.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 5.4%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.1%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 4.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 1.8%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 4.1%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.4%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.2% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Publication 2.2%, sitewide 0.8% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst