Harriette Cole: What if the new boss wants me to work harder? 21%

By Harriette Cole49%

8/6/2026, 2:00:27 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Pessimism Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 15.2% saturation with 89 hits. Analysis detected 561 faulty-reasoning hits from 586 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.6% and a BS Rank of 21% (24,370 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 79.70% of the article peer group.

DEAR HARRIETTE: I was recently brought into a new job by a former manager. 
The job is very low-key, low-effort and low-work, which I’m not complaining about. 
It’s a nice change from the busy job I had at a flagship beauty store. 
Today at work, my manager was offered a promotion that would require her to move stores; as a result, my store would more than likely get a new manager. 
Would it be stupid for me to follow my manager to her new store? 
She brought me onto the team herself, and I’m scared that a new manager will be stricter or less accommodating with my schedule? 
 Job Mover 
DEAR JOB MOVER: What are your goals for this job? 
It sounds like you value convenience and flexibility right now more than a path to a career goal. 
If this manager seems to be in sync with your current needs and desires, ask her whether you can join her at her new store. 
Just make sure you don’t mislead her. 
You will have to show your loyalty to her and her goals if you move with her. 
She may be counting on the energy and effort that you demonstrated at your previous job to help at this new company. 
Find out what her vision is and how you fit into it before you make your pitch. 
DEAR HARRIETTE: I’m struggling with a friendship that used to mean a lot to me but now feels increasingly one-sided. 
This person was once one of my closest friends, but over the past several months, I’ve felt more neglected than valued. 
We live less than 10 minutes apart, yet we’ve seen each other only twice in nearly eight months  and both times, I was the one who reached out and made the plans. 
What’s confusing is that whenever we do spend time together, she says things like, “We should be closer” or “We need to hang out more.” 
But her actions don’t reflect that. 
She’s often out with other friends, yet I’m rarely, if ever, included. 
Recently, she even traveled out of state and made time to see my sister  someone she’s not particularly close to  and sent me a photo saying we’re “sisters for life.” 
That moment really stung. 
The relationship is starting to feel forced and inauthentic. 
Am I expecting too much, or is it time to reevaluate this friendship? 
 Times Have Changed 
DEAR TIMES HAVE CHANGED: Drum up the courage to speak to your friend directly about this. 
Schedule a time to be face to face. 
Tell her how you feel  namely, that she no longer seems to put effort into your friendship and that it hurts your feelings. 
Point out that you used to hang out together but rarely see each other now. 
Tell her you miss her and would like to spend more time together. 
See what she says. 
It could be that you have naturally drifted apart, or it could be something else. 
Listen to learn, and then decide your next steps. 
If she is unwilling to put in more effort, you may have to accept that this friendship’s dynamics have changed. 
It may be time to change your expectations. 
Harriette Cole is a lifestylist and founder of DREAMLEAPERS, an initiative to help people access and activate their dreams. 
You can send questions toaskharriette@harriettecole.com or c/o Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.9%Harriette Cole: 2.6%East Bay Times: 2.7%Confirmation Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.4%East Bay Times: 0.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Harriette Cole: 1.8%East Bay Times: 2.1%Availability Heuristic10.4%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.6%East Bay Times: 0.4%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.6%East Bay Times: 0.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Harriette Cole: 1.0%East Bay Times: 2.7%Framing Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.5%East Bay Times: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 1.4%Harriette Cole: 0.4%East Bay Times: 0.3%Status Quo Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.5%East Bay Times: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 1.5%East Bay Times: 0.9%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.9%Harriette Cole: 1.8%East Bay Times: 1.0%Pessimism Bias8.9%This article: 8.7%Harriette Cole: 6.1%East Bay Times: 5.4%Negativity Bias8.7%This article: 2.2%Harriette Cole: 1.8%East Bay Times: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias2.2%This article: 7.2%Harriette Cole: 3.8%East Bay Times: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error7.2%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.4%East Bay Times: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.4%East Bay Times: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.2%East Bay Times: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.6%East Bay Times: 0.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.3%East Bay Times: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.3%East Bay Times: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.5%East Bay Times: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.6%East Bay Times: 0.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 2.2%Harriette Cole: 3.0%East Bay Times: 0.9%False Dilemma2.2%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.6%Harriette Cole: 2.4%East Bay Times: 2.1%Hasty Generalization5.6%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.7%Harriette Cole: 0.8%East Bay Times: 2.8%Appeal to Emotion0.7%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.3%East Bay Times: 0.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.8%East Bay Times: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.3%Harriette Cole: 0.5%East Bay Times: 0.6%Burden of Proof4.3%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.0%Harriette Cole: 0.9%East Bay Times: 1.1%Anecdotal2.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.6%East Bay Times: 0.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.6%Harriette Cole: 0.2%East Bay Times: 0.1%Middle Ground2.6%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.2%East Bay Times: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.1%East Bay Times: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.6%Harriette Cole: 1.2%East Bay Times: 0.7%Unattributed Quote4.6%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.2%East Bay Times: 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 2.6%Harriette Cole: 1.9%East Bay Times: 4.4%Biased Writer Voice2.6%This article: 15.2%Harriette Cole: 9.3%East Bay Times: 3.6%Indoctrination15.2%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Harriette Cole: 0.0%East Bay Times: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Harriette Cole: 1.8%East Bay Times: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.1%

586 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker3.2%attributed speech567writer words
Selected voice

DREAMLEAPERS

100%flagged-word coverage
19 attributed words100% of attributed speech74% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +97.0 ptsWriter: 3.0%DREAMLEAPERS: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-15.7 ptsWriter: 15.7%DREAMLEAPERS: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.8 ptsWriter: 4.8%DREAMLEAPERS: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.6 ptsWriter: 2.6%DREAMLEAPERS: 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.