Publication summary
52% 12 analyzed articles/videos 11,265 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Phoenix New Times results contain 50 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Hasty Generalization , and Framing Effect , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7% saturation with 2,857 hits . Analysis detected 27,290 faulty-reasoning hits from 41,019 analyzed words across 12 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.3% and a BS Rank of 20% (319 of 395 publications). This Phoenix New Times is better (less manipulative) than 80.70% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 41,019
Article count: 12
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
19% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 19.3% percentile 1.3% BS Score12 analyzed articles41K 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 3.5% 3.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 3.4% 3.4% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 7.0% 7.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 2.5% 2.5% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 2.3% 2.3% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 1.5% 1.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 1.0% 1.0% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 2.7% 2.7% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 4.3% 4.3% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Publication 0.9% 0.9% 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 3.5%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 7.0%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 3.4%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 2.5%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 2.3%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 4.3%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 1.5%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 1.0%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 2.8%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 5.6%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 2.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 2.2%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 2.2%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 3.1% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Publication 2.9%, sitewide 0.5% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.7%, sitewide 2.7% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 2.7%, sitewide 2.0% Recency Bias: Publication 1.3%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst