Keyword summary
⁠93%1 analyzed article/video648 analyzed words
BS Summary: These China Threat To Lng Futures results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Confirmation Bias, and Hasty Generalization, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 18.4% saturation with 358 hits. Analysis detected 2,167 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,944 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠74% (9,808 of 37,536 keywords). This China Threat To Lng Futures is worse (more manipulative) than 73.90% of the peer group.
China Threat To Lng Futures
Keyword ranking list
Keyword details
Total words: 1,944
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

74% percentile
025507510073.9% percentile
4.3% BS Score1 analyzed articles1.9K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

KeywordSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Keyword 1.6%1.6%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 3.1%3.1%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 2.1%2.1%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Keyword 18.4%18.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 15.4%15.4%Pessimism BiasSitewide 1.9%Keyword 8.0%8.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Keyword 15.4%15.4%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Keyword 1.2%1.2%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Keyword 0.8%0.8%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Keyword 0.7%0.7%

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: Keyword 1.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 3.1%, sitewide 19.2%Optimism Bias: Keyword 18.4%, sitewide 6.0%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 15.4%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 15.4%, sitewide 7.5%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 9.2%, sitewide 8.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 6.8%, sitewide 9.1%Pessimism Bias: Keyword 8.0%, sitewide 1.9%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 7.6%, sitewide 4.6%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 3.3%False Dilemma: Keyword 2.8%, sitewide 1.5%Recency Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Bandwagon: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Keyword 2.1%, sitewide 1.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Keyword 1.8%, sitewide 1.7%Unattributed Quote: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 1.1%Hindsight Bias: Keyword 1.1%, sitewide 1.4%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate

Analyzed articles and videos