Drawn to Grisly Movies? This Psychologist Knows Why. 89%

4/29/2026, 12:02:55 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Negativity Bias, and Straw Man, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 38% saturation with 68 hits. Analysis detected 526 faulty-reasoning hits from 179 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 83.2% and a BS Rank of 89% (1,868 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 88.90% of the article peer group.

That’s contrary to what some people think is just common sense: that if you like watching horror movies, or play violent video games, or if you’re interested in seeing someone get injured  like in a car crash or a football game  then you must like the violence itself. 
Not necessarily, says Scrivner. 
It may actually have a lot to do with exploring danger from a place of safety  so you, too, don’t fall victim to the serial killer on TV or the monster in the basement. 
Coltan Scrivner joins us to talk about why it’s not so bad to be the weirdo in your friend group who’s seen all the “Saw” movies. 
And if you’re not sure whether that person is you, you can take Scrivner’s test to find out. 
GUEST  
Coltan Scrivner | He’s an author and a psychologist at Arizona State University. 
His most recent book is “Morbidly Curious: A Scientist Explains Why We Can’t Look Away.” 
[Amazon|Bookshop] 
Airdate: Apr. 30 and May 2, 2026 
Confirmation Bias
19.6%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
10.1%
Framing Effect
38%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
19.6%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
27.9%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
14.5%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
27.9%
Appeal to Authority
11.7%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
19.6%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
19.6%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
19.6%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
10.1%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
2.2%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
30.2%
Indoctrination
14.5%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
8.9%

179 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.