Publication summary
24% 17 analyzed articles/videos 19,882 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Phoenix New Times results contain 51 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice , Framing Effect , and Hasty Generalization , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 4.8% saturation with 4,038 hits . Analysis detected 38,284 faulty-reasoning hits from 84,876 analyzed words across 17 articles, generating a BS Score of 0.9% and a BS Rank of 13% (479 of 548 publications). This Phoenix New Times is better (less manipulative) than 87.40% of the peer group. Publication details
Total words: 84,876
Article count: 17
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed publications
13% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 12.6% percentile 0.9% BS Score17 analyzed articles84.9K 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 3.2% 3.2% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Publication 4.8% 4.8% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Publication 2.0% 2.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Publication 1.6% 1.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Publication 1.8% 1.8% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Publication 0.9% 0.9% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Publication 0.6% 0.6% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Publication 1.4% 1.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Publication 3.0% 3.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Publication 1.6% 1.6% 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 3.2%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Publication 4.8%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Publication 2.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Publication 1.8%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Publication 3.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Publication 4.1%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Publication 1.9%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Publication 0.6%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Publication 0.4%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Publication 1.4%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Publication 1.6%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Publication 0.1%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Publication 0.5%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Publication 0.8%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Publication 0.3%, sitewide 2.5% Bandwagon: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Publication 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Publication 0.9%, sitewide 2.2% Politically Left Leaning Bias: Publication 1.6%, sitewide 2.0% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Publication rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst