US gas prices hit an average of $4 a gallon again as the US and Iran launch attacks ⁠62%

By Associated Press⁠60%

7/20/2026, 8:55:25 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Anchoring Bias, and Optimism Bias, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 39.8% saturation with 104 hits. Analysis detected 493 faulty-reasoning hits from 261 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠62% (7,953 of 20,472 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 61.20% of the article peer group.

NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. gas prices jumped to an average of $4 a gallon again Monday as the U.S. and Iran launched more attacks. 
According to motor club federation AAA, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline is now back to $4. 
The average price a year ago was $3.14 a gallon. 
The price is a national average, meaning drivers in some states have been paying well over $4 a gallon for a while now, while others pay less. 
Prices vary between states due to factors ranging from nearby supply to differing tax rates. 
People around the world are also dealing with high gas prices as a result of the war. 
Gas prices first went over $4 a gallon on average at the end of March. 
They dipped below that in mid-June and continued to fall as crude oil prices eased when the U.S. and Iran reached an interim deal. 
Even then, President Donald Trump expressed frustration that gas prices weren’t falling as quickly as oil prices. 
Affordability is likely to be a key issue for voters in the U.S. midterm elections, and higher gas and oil prices can help push up prices for groceries and other goods. 
Oil prices have climbed again in recent days as the U.S. and Iran move closer to resuming an all-out war. 
Brent crude, the international standard, rose 3.2% to $90.95 per barrel Monday and benchmark U.S. crude climbed 2.8% to $84.04 per barrel. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.2%Associated Press: 2.2%Orlando Sentinel: 1.5%Confirmation Bias9.2%This article: 16.1%Associated Press: 0.8%Orlando Sentinel: 1.0%Anchoring Bias16.1%This article: 6.5%Associated Press: 3.1%Orlando Sentinel: 2.5%Availability Heuristic6.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%Orlando Sentinel: 0.4%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%Orlando Sentinel: 1.1%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.1%Orlando Sentinel: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 24.1%Associated Press: 7.2%Orlando Sentinel: 5.1%Framing Effect24.1%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%Orlando Sentinel: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%Orlando Sentinel: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Orlando Sentinel: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.9%Associated Press: 2.1%Orlando Sentinel: 3.3%Optimism Bias11.9%This article: 6.5%Associated Press: 1.4%Orlando Sentinel: 0.8%Pessimism Bias6.5%This article: 6.5%Associated Press: 8.7%Orlando Sentinel: 6.1%Negativity Bias6.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 2.1%Orlando Sentinel: 2.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%Orlando Sentinel: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.1%Orlando Sentinel: 0.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%Orlando Sentinel: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 2.5%Orlando Sentinel: 3.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.5%Orlando Sentinel: 1.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Associated Press: 0.3%Orlando Sentinel: 0.4%Primacy Effect3.8%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Orlando Sentinel: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%Orlando Sentinel: 0.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.7%Associated Press: 3.5%Orlando Sentinel: 2.3%Appeal to Authority7.7%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%Orlando Sentinel: 0.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 7.7%Associated Press: 0.5%Orlando Sentinel: 0.5%Slippery Slope7.7%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.5%Associated Press: 2.7%Orlando Sentinel: 3.7%Hasty Generalization6.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 11.9%Associated Press: 0.4%Orlando Sentinel: 0.3%Bandwagon11.9%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 4.6%Orlando Sentinel: 3.4%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%Orlando Sentinel: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 39.8%Associated Press: 2.4%Orlando Sentinel: 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)39.8%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 11.9%Associated Press: 0.4%Orlando Sentinel: 0.7%Burden of Proof11.9%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.8%Orlando Sentinel: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Orlando Sentinel: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.3%Orlando Sentinel: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Orlando Sentinel: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Orlando Sentinel: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.3%Orlando Sentinel: 0.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.9%Associated Press: 3.0%Orlando Sentinel: 3.6%Biased Writer Voice6.9%This article: 11.9%Associated Press: 0.7%Orlando Sentinel: 0.4%Indoctrination11.9%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.9%Orlando Sentinel: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%Orlando Sentinel: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%Orlando Sentinel: 5.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

261 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers14%attributed speech224writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coveragemotor club federation AAA • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
17 attributed words46% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination-13.8 ptsWriter: 13.8%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.0 ptsWriter: 8.0%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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