Keyword summary
79%4 analyzed articles/videos3,748 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Energy Consumption results contain 45 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 14% saturation with 1,824 hits. Analysis detected 13,230 faulty-reasoning hits from 13,029 analyzed words across 4 articles, generating a BS Score of 2.3% and a BS Rank of 34% (25,058 of 37,536 keywords). This Energy Consumption is better (less manipulative) than 66.80% of the peer group.
Energy Consumption
Keyword ranking list
PercentileKeywordBS Score
0%Lieutenant Governor1%
0%Agriculture Commissioner1%
0%Texas Supreme Court1%
0%Tropic Care Of Florida1%
0%Running Back1%
34%Energy Consumption (selected)3%
100%Rad Power Bikes60%
100%Mike Lewis60%
100%Joni Balter60%
100%Lawrence O'donnell69%
100%Bondi Beach Shooting70%
Keyword details

Ranking context

Position among analyzed keywords

33% percentile
025507510033.2% percentile
2.3% BS Score4 analyzed articles13K 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 9.6%9.6%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Keyword 9.0%9.0%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Keyword 0.4%0.4%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Keyword 1.9%1.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Keyword 14.0%14.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Keyword 1.9%1.9%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Keyword 4.5%4.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Keyword 4.8%4.8%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Keyword 1.4%1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Keyword 0.6%0.6%

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 9.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Keyword 14.0%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Keyword 9.0%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Keyword 8.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Keyword 4.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Keyword 4.8%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 7.5%In-Group Bias: Keyword 1.9%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Keyword 0.4%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Keyword 3.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Keyword 3.7%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Keyword 3.3%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Keyword 3.6%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Keyword 1.4%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Keyword 3.0%, sitewide 3.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Keyword 0.6%, sitewide 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error: Keyword 0.3%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Keyword 1.3%, sitewide 2.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Keyword 2.7%, sitewide 1.9%Loss Aversion: Keyword 1.7%, sitewide 2.5%Bandwagon: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Keyword 0.7%, sitewide 2.2%Ad Hominem: Keyword 0.8%, sitewide 2.2%Framing EffectSitewide rateKeyword rate