Decision Style Test

[Luminous]

https://www.truity.com/test/decision-style-test

---

Red Light vs. Green Light System​

No matter the particular goal in question, people (and animals) tend to follow a fairly obvious strategy: “pursue what will get me closer to reaching my goal, and avoid what will prevent me from reaching my goal.” Everyone is constantly involved in these games of offense and defense. It is helpful to think of our active, approach (“offense”) motivations as belonging to our “green light system” and our inhibitive, avoidance (“defense”) motivations as belonging to our “red light system.” As they pursue their various goals, people demonstrate individual differences in how sensitive their particular systems are. For example, people who are more anxious can be said to have a “red light system” that can be more easily activated, whereas the more happy-go-lucky types demonstrate a sensitive “green light system.”

Based on your responses, the relative sensitivity of these two systems for you—how sensitive each is compared to the other—is represented below:

Green light 47 Red light 53

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 12% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self vs. Other​

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior. Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.
After assessing your relative valuation of these two goals across a diversity of contexts, the following calibration was determined:


Self 5 Other 95

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 1800% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other​

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.
You indicated the following calibrations in your assessment:

Self 35 Learning 65

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 86% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Other 50 Learning 50

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning​

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.” The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”

Between descriptive and normative learning, you indicated the following calibration in your assessment:

Descriptive 10 Normative 90

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning 800% more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[SD45T-2]

Red Light vs. Green Light System​

No matter the particular goal in question, people (and animals) tend to follow a fairly obvious strategy: “pursue what will get me closer to reaching my goal, and avoid what will prevent me from reaching my goal.” Everyone is constantly involved in these games of offense and defense. It is helpful to think of our active, approach (“offense”) motivations as belonging to our “green light system” and our inhibitive, avoidance (“defense”) motivations as belonging to our “red light system.” As they pursue their various goals, people demonstrate individual differences in how sensitive their particular systems are. For example, people who are more anxious can be said to have a “red light system” that can be more easily activated, whereas the more happy-go-lucky types demonstrate a sensitive “green light system.”


Based on your responses, the relative sensitivity of these two systems for you—how sensitive each is compared to the other—is represented below:

GREEN LIGHT 43% RED LIGHT 57%

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 30% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self vs. Other​

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior. Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.


After assessing your relative valuation of these two goals across a diversity of contexts, the following calibration was determined:

SELF 35% OTHER 65%

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 86% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other​

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.


You indicated the following calibrations in your assessment:

SELF 35% LEARNING 65%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 86% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

OTHER 25% LEARNING 75%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 200% more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning​

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.” The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”


Between descriptive and normative learning, you indicated the following calibration in your assessment:

NORMATIVE 45% DESCRIPTIVE 55%

Your responses indicate that you value descriptive learning 22% more than normative learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more scientifically-minded, logical, systematic, and truth-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing art, literature, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally beautiful. You are likely to be both more rational and more nihilistic than the average person.

 

[RadicalDoubt]

Red Light vs. Green Light System​

Green light 24 Red light 76
Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 225% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess. (OOF)

Self vs. Other​

SELF 35% OTHER 65%
Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 50% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other​

SELF 35% LEARNING 65%
Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 200% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.
Other 50% LEARNING 50%
(I get no description because I seem to value these equally lol)

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning​

NORMATIVE 40% DESCRIPTIVE 60%
Your responses indicate that you value descriptive learning 50% more than normative learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more scientifically-minded, logical, systematic, and truth-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing art, literature, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally beautiful. You are likely to be both more rational and more nihilistic than the average person.

 

[Frosty]

40% green light 60% red light

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 50% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

20% self 80% other


Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 300% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.


learning vs self vs other

30% self 70% learning

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 133% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

50% other 50% learning



descriptive vs normative learning

40% descriptive 60% normative

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning 50% more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[❀༺♥༻ℭ𝔞𝔢𝔩𝔦𝔞_𝔄𝔦𝔰𝔩𝔦𝔫𝔤༺♥༻❀༺]

Red Light vs. Green Light System



83% RED LIGHT



Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 400% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self vs. Other​

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior. Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.
After assessing your relative valuation of these two goals across a diversity of contexts, the following calibration was determined:


20% SELF



Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 300% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other​

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.
You indicated the following calibrations in your assessment:


80% LEARNING



Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 300% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.



70% LEARNING



Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 133% more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning​

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.” The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”
Between descriptive and normative learning, you indicated the following calibration in your assessment:


45% DESCRIPTIVE



Your responses indicate that you value normative learning 22% more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[Maou]

Red Light vs. Green Light System​

No matter the particular goal in question, people (and animals) tend to follow a fairly obvious strategy: “pursue what will get me closer to reaching my goal, and avoid what will prevent me from reaching my goal.” Everyone is constantly involved in these games of offense and defense. It is helpful to think of our active, approach (“offense”) motivations as belonging to our “green light system” and our inhibitive, avoidance (“defense”) motivations as belonging to our “red light system.” As they pursue their various goals, people demonstrate individual differences in how sensitive their particular systems are. For example, people who are more anxious can be said to have a “red light system” that can be more easily activated, whereas the more happy-go-lucky types demonstrate a sensitive “green light system.”
Based on your responses, the relative sensitivity of these two systems for you—how sensitive each is compared to the other—is represented below:

31/69% (nice)

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 125% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self vs. Other​

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior. Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.

After assessing your relative valuation of these two goals across a diversity of contexts, the following calibration was determined:

35/65%

Your responses indicate that you value self-focused goals 86% more than other-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you can truly be said to be your own captain: you are unlikely to cave to unwelcome social pressures when it comes to making your important decisions. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount the thoughts, feelings, opinions, desires, and problems of others.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other​

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.
You indicated the following calibrations in your assessment:

35/65%

Your responses indicate that you value self-focused goals 86% more than learning goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value whatever you consider to be your “work” more than you value learning and exploring. This calibration allows you to stick to personal values and strategies that you know to be successful (“if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”), but it also means that you may shy away from growing, refining, and expanding your own personal goals.

35/65%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 86% more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning​

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.” The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”
Between descriptive and normative learning, you indicated the following calibration in your assessment:

30/70%

Your responses indicate that you value descriptive learning 133% more than normative learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more scientifically-minded, logical, systematic, and truth-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing art, literature, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally beautiful. You are likely to be both more rational and more nihilistic than the average person.

 

[Mayflower]

Green light 56% Red light 44%

Your responses indicate that your “green light system” is 27% more sensitive than your “red light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered bold, enthusiastic, assertive, ambitious, and/or exciting. You would likely be described as fun and outgoing, particularly in social spaces. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more impulsive, over-confident, and/or incautious. This calibration can also lead to making premature decisions when perhaps more deliberation was in order.

Self 45% Other 55%

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 22% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Self 45% Learning 55%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 22% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Descriptive 30% Normative 70%
Your responses indicate that you value normative learning 133% more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[xenaprincess]

Red light 75%, green light 25%…etc.

I thought the questions were odd and annoying.

 

[EJCC]

This was a really interesting test. I got exactly 50/50 red light/green light.

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 133% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 86% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 200% more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning 50% more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[Morpeko]

Red Light (71%) vs. Green Light (29%)

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is 150% more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self (80%) vs. Other (20%)

Your responses indicate that you value self-focused goals 300% more than other-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you can truly be said to be your own captain: you are unlikely to cave to unwelcome social pressures when it comes to making your important decisions. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount the thoughts, feelings, opinions, desires, and problems of others.

Self (60%) vs. Learning (40%)

Your responses indicate that you value self-focused goals 50% more than learning goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value whatever you consider to be your “work” more than you value learning and exploring. This calibration allows you to stick to personal values and strategies that you know to be successful (“if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”), but it also means that you may shy away from growing, refining, and expanding your own personal goals.

Learning (65%) vs. Other (35%)

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 86% more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive (20%) vs. Normative (80%) Learning

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning 300% more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[Falcarius]

47% RED LIGHT vs 53% GREEN LIGHT
Your responses indicate that your “green light system” is 11% more sensitive than your “red light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered bold, enthusiastic, assertive, ambitious, and/or exciting. You would likely be described as fun and outgoing, particularly in social spaces. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more impulsive, over-confident, and/or incautious. This calibration can also lead to making premature decisions when perhaps more deliberation was in order.

30% Self vs 70% other

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals 133% more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Self 25% vs Learning 75%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 200% more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Other25% vs Learning 75%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals 200% more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive 30% vs. Normative 70%

Your responses indicate that you value descriptive learning 133% more than normative learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more scientifically-minded, logical, systematic, and truth-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing art, literature, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally beautiful. You are likely to be both more rational and more nihilistic than the average person.

 

[Kaneda]

Red Light (40%) vs. Green Light (60%) System​

Your responses indicate that your “green light system” is more sensitive than your “red light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered bold, enthusiastic, assertive, ambitious, and/or exciting. You would likely be described as fun and outgoing, particularly in social spaces. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more impulsive, over-confident, and/or incautious. This calibration can also lead to making premature decisions when perhaps more deliberation was in order.

Self (35%) vs. Other (65%)​

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning (65%) vs. Self (35%) and Learning (55%) vs. Other (45%)​

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.
Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive (45%) vs. Normative (55%) Learning​

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[yeghor]

Red Light vs. Green Light System: 77% Red

No matter the particular goal in question, people (and animals) tend to follow a fairly obvious strategy: “pursue what will get me closer to reaching my goal, and avoid what will prevent me from reaching my goal.” Everyone is constantly involved in these games of offense and defense. It is helpful to think of our active, approach (“offense”) motivations as belonging to our “green light system” and our inhibitive, avoidance (“defense”) motivations as belonging to our “red light system.”

As they pursue their various goals, people demonstrate individual differences in how sensitive their particular systems are. For example, people who are more anxious can be said to have a “red light system” that can be more easily activated, whereas the more happy-go-lucky types demonstrate a sensitive “green light system.”

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious.

Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self vs. Other: 75% Other

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior.

Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.

Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning vs. Self: 65% Learning

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Learning vs. Other: 65% Learning

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning: 65% Normative

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.”

The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[everything__dies]

Green Light 15%
Red Light 85%
When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people.

Other 30%
Self 70%
One advantage of this calibration is that you can truly be said to be your own captain: you are unlikely to cave to unwelcome social pressures when it comes to making your important decisions

Learning 45%
Self 55%
This calibration allows you to stick to personal values and strategies that you know to be successful (“if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”), but it also means that you may shy away from growing, refining, and expanding your own personal goals.

Learning 40%
Other 60%
Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value caring for others more than you value learning, growing, and exploring.

Normative 50%
Descriptive 50%
Because you recognize the value of both of these learning motivations, you are likely to find topics at the intersection of these two intellectual lenses to be particularly interesting.


I like how it was very detailed in the results.

I thought the questions were odd and annoying.

Some were repeated too!

Here are the weirdest ones I got.

"You are on vacation, and it is museum day. You were planning on going to a famous art museum in the morning and a well-known natural history museum in the afternoon. You realize when you wake up that due to traffic, you’ll only have time for one of these museums."
Maybe better stay home if it's that busy?

"Two friends have invited you to dinner on the same night. You know that one friend—call them Parker—is going to want to chat about their relationships and any new "drama," while the other friend—call them Quinn—is going to want to talk about an interesting online course they just took. Who would you prefer to get dinner with?"
Just dinner? Or staying over?

"You just arrived at your friend’s house. A group of friends is outside, and you can hear them talking, though they can’t see you yet. As you walk closer, you hear them being mean about someone, though you can’t quite tell who. Once you say hello, they seem to change the subject fairly quickly."
VERY descriptive . . .

"We are currently investigating how your decision style might correlate with biological factors like your sense of taste. If you would like to participate in this research, please answer the questions below."

 

[Kephalos]

Decision Style Test: My Results (in English and Businessese).

Red Light vs. Green Light System (Description):

No matter the particular goal in question, people (and animals) tend to follow a fairly obvious strategy: “pursue what will get me closer to reaching my goal, and avoid what will prevent me from reaching my goal.” Everyone is constantly involved in these games of offense and defense. It is helpful to think of our active, approach (“offense”) motivations as belonging to our “green light system” and our inhibitive, avoidance (“defense”) motivations as belonging to our “red light system.” As they pursue their various goals, people demonstrate individual differences in how sensitive their particular systems are. For example, people who are more anxious can be said to have a “red light system” that can be more easily activated, whereas the more happy-go-lucky types demonstrate a sensitive “green light system.”

Red Light System: 94%. Green Light System: 6%.
Your responses indicate that your “red light system” is more sensitive than your “green light system.” When this calibration functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. You have an emotional sensitivity that equips you to notice and address things that fly under the radar of other people. When this calibration functions less well, however, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious. Most simply, being more sensitive to “red light” signals than to “green light” signals can also mean that individuals of your orientation more commonly experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, frustration, disappointment, and sadness. While these emotions are actually quite useful in moderation (they warn us when something’s not right), they can of course become problematic in excess.

Self vs. Other (Description):

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior. Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.

Self: 25%. Other: 75%.
Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals more than self-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you are likely admired in social spaces for being a good listener, a respectful peer, and a compassionate friend. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount your own personal opinions, preferences, and beliefs in the service of accommodating the people around you.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other (Description):

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.

Learning: 90% vs. Self: 10%
Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Learning: 40% vs. Other: 60%
Your responses indicate that you value other-focused goals more than learning goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value caring for others more than you value learning, growing, and exploring. This calibration allows you to successfully maintain relationships and social behaviors over longer stretches of time, but it also means that you may shy away from growing, refining, and expanding your social circle and/or the general manner in which you approach others.

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning (Description):

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.” The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”

Descriptive Learning: 15%. Normative Learning: 85%.
Your responses indicate that you value normative learning more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[Burning Paradigm]

Red Light vs. Green Light System​

No matter the particular goal in question, people (and animals) tend to follow a fairly obvious strategy: “pursue what will get me closer to reaching my goal, and avoid what will prevent me from reaching my goal.” Everyone is constantly involved in these games of offense and defense. It is helpful to think of our active, approach (“offense”) motivations as belonging to our “green light system” and our inhibitive, avoidance (“defense”) motivations as belonging to our “red light system.” As they pursue their various goals, people demonstrate individual differences in how sensitive their particular systems are. For example, people who are more anxious can be said to have a “red light system” that can be more easily activated, whereas the more happy-go-lucky types demonstrate a sensitive “green light system.”

Based on your responses, the relative sensitivity of these two systems for you—how sensitive each is compared to the other—is represented below:

Green: 50%, Red 50%

Your responses indicate that your “red light system” and “green light system” are essentially balanced with one another (see pie chart for exact calculation). It is therefore likely that you regularly experience the advantages and disadvantages of both systems. We will briefly run through each of these below. When your “green light system” functions well, you might be considered bold, enthusiastic, assertive, ambitious, and/or exciting. When it functions less well, you might be considered more impulsive, over-confident, and/or incautious. When your “red light system” functions well, you might be considered judicious, discerning, deliberative, and thoughtful. When it functions less well, you might be considered more nervous, timid, and/or overly cautious.

Self vs. Other​

A simple, powerful, and empirically-supported way to differentiate and categorize our diverse goals is by sorting them into two motivational camps: self-focused (goals have to do with me) and other-focused (goals that have to do with others). Self-focused goals are not intrinsically selfish, and other-focused goals are not intrinsically selfless. Self-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “work.” Generating an income, exercising, keeping healthy and clean, competing, and doing life’s necessary duties are all classic examples of self-focused behavior. Other-focused goals are best thought of as what we refer to when we call something “care” (in the social sense). Nurturing, cooperating, bonding, and attending to the thoughts and feelings of others are all classic examples of other-focused behavior. Individuals differ substantially in the relative value they place in self-focused and other-focused goals.
After assessing your relative valuation of these two goals across a diversity of contexts, the following calibration was determined:

Other: 30%, Self: 70%

Your responses indicate that you value self-focused goals more than other-focused goals. One advantage of this calibration is that you can truly be said to be your own captain: you are unlikely to cave to unwelcome social pressures when it comes to making your important decisions. One disadvantage of this calibration, however, is that you may erroneously discount the thoughts, feelings, opinions, desires, and problems of others.

Learning vs. Self and Learning vs. Other​

While it is true that all of our decisions will demonstrate some calibration of self-focused and other-focused decision-making, there is also a third major motivator that consistently plays into our behavior: the motivation to learn. Because we are ever-changing people who navigate ever-changing worlds, we naturally work to keep our knowledge up-to-date so that we can continue to pursue our (self- and other-focused) goals properly. For this reason, it is helpful to think of learning as its own discrete motivation. We can compare the relative strength of your motivation to learn with both your self-focused motivation and your other-focused motivation.
You indicated the following calibrations in your assessment:

Learning: 70%, Self: 30%

Learning: 55%, Other: 45%

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than self-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you tend to value learning, growing, and exploring more than you value whatever you consider to be your “work.” One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to chart your own course in life instead of simply following traditions and customs. One disadvantage of valuing your own self-update is that you may have more trouble zeroing in on and sticking to a concrete life path.

Your responses indicate that you value learning goals more than other-focused goals. Roughly speaking, this means that you are more motivated to learn, grow, and explore more than you are motivated to attend to others. One advantage of this calibration is that you are more likely to form your own beliefs, opinions, and preferences instead of simply following what others do. One disadvantage of prioritizing growth is that you may have more trouble maintaining stable relationships over long periods of time (especially if you are changing more rapidly than others).

Descriptive vs. Normative Learning​

This assessment investigates two general categories of learning. The first category is about our understanding of the world around us. This kind of information tends to be factual, nonfictional, logical, and external to the individual. We can call this form of self-update “descriptive learning.” The second category of learning is not about our understanding of the world, but our understanding of ourselves and what we value. Art, literature, philosophy, poetry, music, culture (and, more traditionally, religion) largely relate to information of this kind. This information tends to be captured by fiction and is not explicitly logical or fact-based. We can call this form of self-update “normative learning.”
Between descriptive and normative learning, you indicated the following calibration in your assessment:

Normative: 60%, Descriptive: 40%

Your responses indicate that you value normative learning more than descriptive learning. This kind of orientation often indicates a more humanistic, holistic, linguistic, and beauty-oriented perspective. In the service of these interests, individuals of this orientation may naturally spend less time pursuing science, technology, and (put most generally) things that are fundamentally true. You are more likely to let your heart guide you, which can lead to passionate—but sometimes irrational—decisions.

 

[xXxXx_wEltschmErz_xXxXx]

Green 32 / Red 68
Other 40 / Self 60
Self 25 / Learning 75
Other 15 / Learning 85
Descriptive 20 / Normative 80