Rice consumption in fiscal 2025 the lowest in seven years 69%

By Jessica Speed0%

5/27/2026, 5:30:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Representativeness Heuristic, Overconfidence Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 47.5% saturation with 58 hits. Analysis detected 366 faulty-reasoning hits from 122 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 62.7% and a BS Rank of 69% (5,269 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 68.70% of the article peer group.

Rice consumption in Japan fell to its lowest level in seven years in fiscal 2025, as soaring prices pushed more consumers toward cheaper staples such as bread and noodles. 
Average monthly rice consumption declined 6.1% from the previous year to 4.435 kilograms per person, according to a consumer survey released by an industry-backed Japanese body that tracks supply-demand trends for the staple. 
The drop is equivalent to about 4.4 bowls of rice per person over the course of the year, based on a standard serving size of 65 grams of rice. 
The nationwide survey, conducted online via a self-administered questionnaire, estimated at-home rice consumption based on household inventories, purchases and family size. 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
23.8%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
44.3%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
27%
Framing Effect
47.5%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
23.8%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
8.2%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
27%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
23.8%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
23.8%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
23.8%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
27%

122 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.