BS Summary: This article contains 5 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Negativity Bias, and Recency Bias, with Primacy Effect as the most egregious example at 13.7% saturation with 20 hits. Analysis detected 57 faulty-reasoning hits from 146 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 1% (26,305 of 26,447 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 99.50% of the article peer group.

Ronald Rosario hit a three-run home run to cap an eight-run sixth inning for the Portland Sea Dogs in their 12-2 run over the Harrisburg Senators in an Eastern League game Sunday at Hadlock Field. 
Gage Ziehl earned the win, allowing a run on six hits, while striking out eight and walking one in six innings. 
Portland took a 4-0 lead in the fourth inning on a bases loaded walk by Max Ferguson and a three-run double by Matt Frazier. 
Will Turner started the Sea Dogs outburst in the sixth with an RBI double. 
Tyler McDonough and Yoelin Cespesdes (making his Double-A debut) each added a two-run single before Rosario’s three-run blast to center. 
The eight-run inning was a season-high for Portland, which improved to 19-14 in the second half. 
McDonough and Rosario each had two hits for Portland. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 2.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 1.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 2.6%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 3.6%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 4.1%Optimism Bias11.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 3.0%Negativity Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 1.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 3.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 1.8%Recency Bias4.8%This article: 13.7%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.4%Primacy Effect13.7%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 2.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 2.0%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.8%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 4.9%Biased Writer Voice4.8%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 1.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 1.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Martin: 0.0%The Portland Press Herald: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

146 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker9.6%attributed speech132writer words
Selected voice

Will Turner

0%flagged-word coverage
14 attributed words100% of attributed speech33% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-5.3 ptsWriter: 5.3%Will Turner: 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.