BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, Confirmation Bias, and Anchoring Bias, with Overconfidence Bias as the most egregious example at 21.9% saturation with 43 hits. Analysis detected 300 faulty-reasoning hits from 196 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.9% and a BS Rank of 61% (11,646 of 29,795 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 60.90% of the article peer group.

It's that time again! 
"Mad Money" host Jim Cramer rings the lightning round bell, which means he's giving his answers to callers' stock questions at rapid speed. 
Forgent Power Solutions: "I would tell you that this company is not cheap, but I think that the stock is right versus the others that are in the group." 
NVE Corp: "I don't want to be glib about this. 
I need to know better. 
I need to know this company more because it just moved up so much." 
Summit Therapeutics: "It's a great spec. 
This can be your spec." 
Carvana: "It is a buying opportunity. ... 
This was a good quarter." 
Reddit: "I'm not a seller of Reddit here. 
I was surprised that the stock got hit as bad as it did. 
It should not have done so." 
Sign up now for the CNBC Investing Club to follow Jim Cramer's every move in the market. 
Disclaimer 
Questions for Cramer? 
Call Cramer: 1-800-743-CNBC 
Want to take a deep dive into Cramer's world? 
Hit him up! 
Mad Money Twitter - Jim Cramer Twitter - Facebook - Instagram 
Questions, comments, suggestions for the "Mad Money" website? 
madcap@cnbc.com 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 17.3%Alexa LoMonaco: 6.3%CNBC: 3.7%Confirmation Bias17.3%This article: 14.8%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.5%CNBC: 1.9%Anchoring Bias14.8%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.3%CNBC: 2.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.9%CNBC: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.1%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.7%CNBC: 0.5%Hindsight Bias3.1%This article: 21.9%Alexa LoMonaco: 5.2%CNBC: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias21.9%This article: 11.7%Alexa LoMonaco: 2.6%CNBC: 4.8%Framing Effect11.7%This article: 3.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.1%CNBC: 0.8%Loss Aversion3.6%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.3%CNBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 4.3%CNBC: 6.5%Optimism Bias6.6%This article: 8.2%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.6%CNBC: 1.7%Pessimism Bias8.2%This article: 6.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 3.1%CNBC: 5.0%Negativity Bias6.6%This article: 4.1%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.6%CNBC: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.5%CNBC: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.2%CNBC: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.1%CNBC: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 2.7%CNBC: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 9.7%Alexa LoMonaco: 2.4%CNBC: 2.1%Recency Bias9.7%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.2%CNBC: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.4%CNBC: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 4.5%CNBC: 3.7%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.3%CNBC: 0.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.5%CNBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.6%Alexa LoMonaco: 5.4%CNBC: 3.3%Hasty Generalization5.6%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.0%CNBC: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.4%CNBC: 1.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.7%CNBC: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 7.1%Alexa LoMonaco: 3.2%CNBC: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.1%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.6%CNBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.2%CNBC: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.3%CNBC: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.7%CNBC: 1.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.8%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.3%CNBC: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.8%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.3%CNBC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.2%CNBC: 1.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.1%CNBC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.5%CNBC: 2.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 1.9%CNBC: 0.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexa LoMonaco: 0.0%CNBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 17.9%Alexa LoMonaco: 8.2%CNBC: 3.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…17.9%

196 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers81%attributed speech37writer words
100%flagged-word coverage
29 attributed words18% of attributed speech19% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -18.9 ptsWriter: 18.9%Forgent Power Solutions: 0.0%0.0%

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.