1 dead in wrong-way Dan Ryan Expy. crash 4%

By Sun-Times Wire11%

7/31/2026, 6:02:37 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 2 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 27.1% saturation with 26 hits. Analysis detected 44 faulty-reasoning hits from 96 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 11.5% and a BS Rank of 4% (27,804 of 28,846 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 96.40% of the article peer group.

One person died and others were injured Friday evening when a wrong-way driver caused a five-vehicle crash on the Dan Ryan Expressway, Illinois State Police said. 
A southbound driver entered the northbound express lanes of I-94 near 31st Street and crashed about three miles south near Garfield Boulevard around 5:50 p.m., the state police said in a statement. 
State police said multiple people were injured, without saying how many, and that one person was pronounced dead. 
Northbound traffic was being diverted off at 67th Street, state police said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.8%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.5%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.7%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 2.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.5%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 2.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 3.8%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.7%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 27.1%Sun-Times Wire: 9.4%Chicago Sun-Times: 6.5%Negativity Bias27.1%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.4%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.2%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 3.3%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.8%Chicago Sun-Times: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.7%Chicago Sun-Times: 4.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.8%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.7%Chicago Sun-Times: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.4%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 18.8%Sun-Times Wire: 3.9%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.3%Unattributed Quote18.8%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 1.7%Chicago Sun-Times: 3.7%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.5%Chicago Sun-Times: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.0%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.1%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sun-Times Wire: 0.5%Chicago Sun-Times: 0.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

96 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker92%attributed speech8writer words
Selected voice

Illinois State Police

50%flagged-word coverage
88 attributed words100% of attributed speech0% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Unattributed Quote+20.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Illinois State Police: 20.5%20.5%

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.