Agree on Specific Sharing without Scoring How Public You Are
Review agreement before mentioning a relationship, social visibility, different audiences and shared privacy. These six prompts focus on negotiation, not how public or important the relationship is.
The mean summarizes agreement with six negotiation and privacy statements, not degree of publicity. Agreement requires no disclosure of a relationship, identity or shared experience.
The Focus Is Negotiation, Not Amount of Publicity
- The six statements cover agreement before mentioning a relationship, comfort on social platforms, different audiences, keeping shared experiences private, willingness before introductions and renegotiation when preferences change. They do not set greater publicity as a better direction.
- You may agree with these negotiation statements while wanting very few people to hear about the relationship. You may also want a particular relationship label shared without details. Specify content, audience and present wishes separately instead of inferring a publicity level from the sum.
How the Six-Item Mean Is Calculated
- Add six numeric responses from 1 to 5 for a raw sum of 6–30, then divide by six and display up to four decimal places. Responses 4, 3, 5, 2, 4, 3 total 21 and average 3.5; a total of 29 averages 4.8333. This summarizes agreement, not frequency or population standing.
- The web edition permits an unscored response. One such answer withholds this group’s numbers rather than becoming a 3 or a low score. Other complete groups remain available, and all four guides stay readable. The original Mini requires all 24 numeric responses before personal interpretation; the two completeness policies are stated separately.
One Shared Photo Contains Several Decisions
- You want to share a photo together. You can separately check whether the other person wants that photo posted, who may see it, whether names are included and whether the relationship is mentioned. A private photo is not permission to publish it, and agreement to one photo does not cover later ones.
- If your wishes differ, you can choose not to post or discuss a specific version you both want. The useful information is what each person wants for this instance, not a score used to argue for greater publicity. The test result itself can remain private throughout.
Equal Means Can Accompany Different Visibility Choices
- Two people may both value discussion and choice while one mentions the relationship only to close friends and another is comfortable across several settings. Their means cannot distinguish these arrangements or establish who values a relationship more.
- Audiences, family circumstances, work environments and practical safety conditions can differ. You do not need to explain every reason to the test or interpret privacy as shame, concealment or insufficient investment. Which conditions matter remains a question for your actual circumstances.
Visibility Is Separate from the Other Three Parts
- Sharing feelings in private does not establish a wish for more people to know about a relationship. Regular time together does not require public schedules or photos. An introduction to others does not replace present confirmation for any physical closeness.
- The four means do not compensate for one another. A visibility score cannot offset a wish for time alone, less verbal sharing or a pause. Other parts cannot supply permission to disclose information. Discuss each specific matter separately.
Separate Three Sharing Categories and Leave Room for Uncertainty
- If you both already want to discuss sharing, distinguish “currently comfortable sharing this way,” “ask each time” and “not for sharing now.” Discuss only a point you want to address. There is no need to list every private identity or experience.
- Before sharing, check whether this content and audience are within the agreement you actually made. Preferences can be discussed again when they change. An arrangement is not a permanent disclosure promise, and the test requires no post as proof of a relationship.
Publicity Does Not Prove Importance or Identity
- This part cannot establish orientation, identity, relationship status, loyalty, shame or another person’s intentions. It cannot require coming out or introducing a partner. One person’s responses cannot decide what may be disclosed about another.
- You can leave an item unscored, keep numbers private, avoid public discussion of a relationship or stop the exercise. The mean does not judge whether those choices are reasonable or demand more disclosure to explain them. The subject is a particular information boundary, not a target level of publicity.
Source, Web Privacy and Retaking
- This edition preserves the six original Chinese statements and forward scoring from FermatMind’s original Intimacy Preferences Mini. English is a new working translation without established cross-language equivalence. These web examples add explanation; they do not establish psychometric validation.
- Web answers stay only in the current page’s memory and clear on reload, language change or leaving. The website does not inherit the original Mini’s device draft or result cache. When retaking, use the conditions you can confirm then; different responses need not establish a changed preference.