Publication summary
17%2 analyzed articles/videos400 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Pasadena Now results contain 23 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Self-Serving Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 5.5% saturation with 187 hits. Analysis detected 1,445 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,396 analyzed words across 2 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.9% and a BS Rank of 49% (210 of 409 publications). This Pasadena Now is better (less manipulative) than 51.20% of the peer group.
Pasadena Now
Publication ranking list
PercentilePublicationBS Score
0%WSB-TV Channel 2 - Atlanta1%
1%Brookings1%
1%The Banner1%
1%FactCheck.org1%
1%@politifact1%
49%Pasadena Now (selected)2%
99%Utah Hockey Club13%
100%MS NOW Insights Community23%
100%MS NOW Live Events26%
100%www.globalsecurity.org30%
100%NBC 6 South Florida33%
Publication details
Total words: 3,396
Article count: 2
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed publications

49% percentile
025507510048.8% percentile
1.9% BS Score2 analyzed articles3.4K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

PublicationSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Publication 5.5%5.5%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Publication 2.4%2.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Publication 3.9%3.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Publication 1.7%1.7%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Publication 1.1%1.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Publication 0.4%0.4%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Publication 2.0%2.0%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Publication 1.5%1.5%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Publication 1.6%1.6%Recency BiasSitewide 2.7%Publication 0.2%0.2%

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 5.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Publication 2.4%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.9%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Publication 1.7%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 9.1%Confirmation Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Publication 5.1%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 5.2%Self-Serving Bias: Publication 3.8%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.0%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 1.1%Recency Bias: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.5%Sunk Cost Effect: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 0.3%Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 2.2%False Dilemma: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 1.4%Special Pleading: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection: Publication 1.1%, sitewide 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Publication 0.8%, sitewide 0.8%Circular Reasoning: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 0.1%Framing EffectSitewide ratePublication rate

Analyzed articles and videos