Notice the response, its context and the question you were holding.
Read this original relationship response with ordinary examples, possible uses and costs, mixed answers and separate raw frequency.
Four original prompts; at least three numeric ratings for a raw 1–5 mean. Unscored is not zero. No overall score or main reaction type.
Your attention is the subject
This part records comparing your place with someone else’s, returning to a casual mention, looking for signs of competing importance and mentally replaying how another person was discussed. It concerns what occupied your attention in the chosen recent context. A higher mean does not verify a rival, betrayal, preference or threat. The questionnaire has no evidence about another person’s actions or intentions and asks you to provide no names or private details.
A name mentioned in passing
Imagine someone mentioning an ordinary conversation with a friend. You may notice yourself returning to how that friend was described, while knowing very little about the exchange. Another time, a similar mention may pass without much thought. This example separates the amount of attention a thought receives from the accuracy of its interpretation. The result cannot tell you what happened, what a relationship means or whether there is anything to investigate.
Noticing concern and treating it as evidence differ
A possible useful side is noticing that a comparison matters to you before calling it a fact about someone else. A possible cost is allowing a small detail to dominate how you understand an entire exchange. Neither follows automatically from the mean. More frequent attention is not proof of sharper intuition, and less frequent attention is not proof of greater trust. No result supports monitoring, demanding access or asking another person to disprove a suspicion.
Comparison and replay are different moments
You may rarely compare your place with another person’s yet replay the wording of a mention. Another person may notice a comparison quickly and then move on. Their means can be similar despite those different sequences. Four statements do not measure the length of every thought, its intensity or the reasons it arose. The individual answers remain more specific than a general label such as jealous or unbothered.
A thought does not require one particular response
Attention to possible rivals can coexist with direct reassurance requests, extra giving or indirect checks, but no part determines the others. Someone may notice a comparison and choose not to act. Another may seek reassurance about an unrelated uncertainty. The report does not turn their combination into a main reaction type or a level of relationship heaviness. It describes selected self-reports, without deciding what you should conclude about anyone.
Separate what you noticed from what you inferred
If useful, describe one ordinary cue in a few words, then separately name the interpretation that came to mind. You need not keep the cue, verify the interpretation or discuss it with anyone. This optional note is for understanding your own attention and remains outside the questionnaire. You can leave every item unscored when the setting is unsuitable, read another guide or end without a next step.
Four raw frequencies, with missing answers preserved
For the past three months, choose 1 never, 2 rarely, 3 sometimes, 4 often or 5 almost always. Three is a frequency answer rather than uncertainty. Choose unscored for unsuitable experiences, uncertainty or a choice not to answer. All sixteen prompts need a response. Each part needs three numeric ratings out of four. With 2, 3 and 5 plus one unscored response, the mean is 10 / 3, displayed as 3.3, not 10 / 4. With fewer ratings it shows insufficient information. The four means stay separate; bars are not percentages or severity levels.
Original observations without a personal label
FermatMind authored these sixteen prompts and four full guides. Reliability, validity, norms and language equivalence have not been established. These are ordinary self-reported responses, not a menhera identity, attachment classification, mental health diagnosis or measure of a partner. No main type, heaviness level, love score or judgment about continuing a relationship is assigned. All parts may be high, low or equal. Low values do not prove calmness, and missing answers establish no personal conclusion. Every guide stays free and open; no disclosure, contact or change of relationship is required.