Equal choices for both sides of the certainty and flexibility dimension
A 6:6 tie means the two sides were selected equally often across these 12 items. Both remain without a forced leader. The counts cannot establish whether you switch with circumstances or are balancing two current needs; those explanations require an actual example.
Each side was selected six times in 12 comparisons. No side leads on this dimension; the other dimension is read separately.
Both sides of this comparison
- This dimension compares which arrangements you selected more often: clear plans, continuity, predictability and retaining what works, or flexibility, adjustments to current circumstances and exploring new shared experiences.
- Certainty, continuity and planning: wanting clear plans for important matters, explicit agreement about stages and continued useful routines.
- Flexibility, change and shared experience: wanting arrangements to adjust, definitions to develop through experience and occasional new approaches.
- These options include forming a fairly clear plan when discussing the future.
- Items about a change of relationship stage include confirming how both people define it first.
- Other items concern deciding the main parts of a holiday in advance and steady contributions to a shared goal.
- The bank also uses re-establishing certainty after practical circumstances change as an arrangement option.
- These options include retaining room to adjust when discussing the future.
- Items about changes of relationship stage include letting a definition develop through experience.
- Other items concern deciding a holiday near departure and adjusting the rhythm of living arrangements to current circumstances.
- The bank also uses exploring an experience when a new opportunity appears as a way to leave flexibility.
Why 6:6 remains a tie
- The dimension has 12 paired items. Each chosen side receives one count and the two always sum to 12. Compare only these two sides, without percentiles, intensity or accuracy claims.
- A 6:6 tie means the two sides were selected equally often across these 12 items. Both remain without a forced leader. The counts cannot establish whether you switch with circumstances or are balancing two current needs; those explanations require an actual example.
What unequal counts would mean
- More left-side choices, such as 7:5, mean you selected certainty and planning relatively more often in these 12 items. The actual arrangements still need to be checked against your experience.
- More right-side choices, such as 5:7, mean you selected flexibility and new experiences relatively more often in these 12 items. This does not establish instability or avoidance of commitment.
Questions for an actual situation
- When a plan last changed, did your first response favor settling an arrangement or adjusting it?
- When money, health or commitment were involved, did the room you wanted for flexibility narrow?
- Which items might you answer differently in another attempt, and what made you hesitate?
- The side selected less often is not a missing capacity, defect or an arrangement you cannot use. It was selected less often in this attempt.
Read the other dimension separately
- This dimension is counted and read separately from contact and personal space. More settled planning can accompany more personal space, or any other pattern, without forming a fixed type. Separate scoring does not establish statistical independence.
- This dimension does not measure seriousness, responsibility or reliability, predict stability or duration, or establish who is more mature.
A fictional example, counterexample and private exercise
- Imagine a fictional day trip with a fixed return time and an afternoon activity not yet chosen. This illustrates one possible arrangement containing certainty and flexibility. It is not an inference from a 6:6 result, and another situation may call for different details. The counts do not establish which part should be fixed, whether a change is welcome or how either person will react.
- “I am equally flexible and reliable” turns two equal raw counts into two abilities. “The tie lets either person change anything” invents permission. Both sides still need specific agreements; the other contact-and-space dimension does not resolve those unknowns.
- Privately sort one fictional plan into fixed, adjustable and unknown. Write why each placement matters and one question that could change it. Do not rank the whole relationship or combine the two dimensions into a type. You can stop with the draft.
A tie does not assign a person
- This is an equal count within one dimension of an original 24-item bank, not perfect balance, a measure of either ability or a combined relationship type. Context and willingness need their own information. The bank has not completed psychometric validation, representative norms or cross-language equivalence testing.
- The result does not judge affection, maturity, attachment or partner fit, predict a relationship, or decide commitment, cohabitation, marriage or separation. You can read the guide without disclosing answers or taking any action.