Topic summary
⁠79%1 analyzed article/video1,477 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Energy Sector results contain 36 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 17.1% saturation with 1,011 hits. Analysis detected 6,587 faulty-reasoning hits from 5,908 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 3.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠65% (8,361 of 23,407 topics). This Energy Sector is worse (more manipulative) than 64.30% of the peer group.
Energy Sector
Topic details
Total words: 5,908
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

64% percentile
025507510064.3% percentile
3.1% BS Score1 analyzed articles5.9K 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 5.7%5.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 17.1%17.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 3.1%3.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 14.8%14.8%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 1.9%1.9%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 8.9%8.9%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 0.6%0.6%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Topic 0.6%0.6%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Topic 6.1%6.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 15.8%15.8%

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 5.7%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 15.8%, sitewide 19.2%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 17.1%, sitewide 5.3%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.9%, sitewide 15.9%Confirmation Bias: Topic 14.8%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 6.9%Ad Hominem: Topic 6.1%, sitewide 2.2%Anecdotal: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 5.2%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 4.6%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 3.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 1.6%, sitewide 3.3%Begging the Question: Topic 3.3%, sitewide 1.7%Pessimism Bias: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 2.7%Loss Aversion: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Topic 2.1%, sitewide 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 1.9%Slippery Slope: Topic 1.2%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos