Joan M. Janus Obituary | July 26, 2026 | Hartford Courant ⁠5%

By Hartford Courant⁠19%

8/1/2026, 9:05:00 PM

Topics: Obituary

BS Summary: This article contains 3 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion and Biased Writer Voice, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 18.2% saturation with 10 hits. Analysis detected 30 faulty-reasoning hits from 55 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 13.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (25,755 of 26,844 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 95.90% of the article peer group.

Joan M. 
Janus 
OBITUARY 
South Windsor-Joan M. 
Janus, age 83, passed away at her residence on July 26, 2026. 
She is survived by two children and four grandchildren. 
She will be greatly missed by all who knew her. 
There will be no calling hours. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Hartford Courant: 2.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.7%Hartford Courant: 1.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.2%Hartford Courant: 0.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.2%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.5%Hartford Courant: 2.2%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.5%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 2.2%Hartford Courant: 1.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 1.0%Hartford Courant: 2.2%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Hartford Courant: 0.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.5%Hartford Courant: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 13.4%Hartford Courant: 7.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.5%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Hartford Courant: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Hartford Courant: 0.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Hartford Courant: 0.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 18.2%Hartford Courant: 1.2%Hartford Courant: 0.7%Hasty Generalization18.2%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 18.2%Hartford Courant: 7.0%Hartford Courant: 4.1%Appeal to Emotion18.2%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.4%Hartford Courant: 0.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 2.4%Hartford Courant: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.4%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.6%Hartford Courant: 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Hartford Courant: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 18.2%Hartford Courant: 13.9%Hartford Courant: 7.2%Biased Writer Voice18.2%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.2%Hartford Courant: 0.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hartford Courant: 0.6%Hartford Courant: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

55 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker16%attributed speech46writer words
Selected voice

Hartford Courant

0%flagged-word coverage
9 attributed words100% of attributed speech22% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Biased Writer Voice-21.7 ptsWriter: 21.7%Hartford Courant: 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.