Topic summary
⁠41%1 analyzed article/video869 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Oil Tanker Attacks results contain 31 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Self-Serving Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 15.3% saturation with 531 hits. Analysis detected 2,617 faulty-reasoning hits from 3,476 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 2.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠38% (10,399 of 16,562 topics). This Oil Tanker Attacks is better (less manipulative) than 62.80% of the peer group.
Oil Tanker Attacks
Topic details
Total words: 3,476
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

37% percentile
025507510037.2% percentile
2.4% BS Score1 analyzed articles3.5K 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 15.3%15.3%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.9%7.9%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Topic 0.5%0.5%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 5.5%5.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 0.5%0.5%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Topic 2.2%2.2%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 3.5%3.5%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.8%0.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 1.3%1.3%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Topic 3.1%3.1%

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 15.3%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.9%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 5.5%, sitewide 15.9%Appeal to Authority: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 11.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 2.2%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 7.5%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 7.0%, sitewide 3.7%In-Group Bias: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 6.9%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.8%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 1.3%, sitewide 5.3%Overconfidence Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 4.6%Anchoring Bias: Topic 2.8%, sitewide 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.3%, sitewide 3.3%Begging the Question: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 2.7%Recency Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 2.2%Slippery Slope: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.7%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 1.9%Pessimism Bias: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Topic 1.5%, sitewide 0.0%False Dilemma: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 1.5%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos