Topic summary
⁠14%1 analyzed article/video1,425 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Energy Assistance Programs results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Authority, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 4.6% saturation with 265 hits. Analysis detected 1,358 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,700 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 0.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠2% (22,721 of 23,104 topics). This Energy Assistance Programs is better (less manipulative) than 98.30% of the peer group.
Energy Assistance Programs
Topic details
Total words: 5,700
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

2% percentile
02550751001.7% percentile
0.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.7K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 1.4%1.4%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 1.2%1.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 4.7%4.7%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 1.5%1.5%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.7%0.7%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.7%0.7%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.0%2.0%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.6%0.6%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 0.6%0.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.3%0.3%

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: Topic 1.4%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 4.7%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 7.5%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 4.0%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 3.7%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.4%, sitewide 3.3%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 2.5%Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 2.2%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Begging the Question: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.7%False Dilemma: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.5%Hindsight Bias: Topic 0.3%, sitewide 1.4%Special Pleading: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 0.3%Unattributed Quote: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.1%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos