If your question is not listed below, please refer to our Science page or contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org
That's where we were around Y2K, and it was a useful signpost to what we know now.
While those hemispheres are important and aren't identical mirror images, the way we process information is more complicated and distributed than that binary description suggests.
If you have the stomach for a wild ride, download the interactive brain atlas from the Allen Institute.
Rhetorician E. C. White powerfully defines Kairos as "a passing instant when an opening appears which must be driven through with force if success is to be achieved."
The ancient Greeks identified this optimum thing at the optimum time in both creation and destruction.
In weaving, kairos is the moment in weaving when the threads of the loom open to allow the shuttle to pass through.
In archery, it's the moment the bow is taut enough to launch the arrow to penetrate a target.
Kairos happens at the alignment of time, attention, energy, and place.
Your cognitive preferences represent the strength of your reflexive response to information from seven neuro-physical processes. When we began this work, we were looking for ideal cognitive preferences. We haven't found any. It appears our strengths and weaknesses come from the same place. What makes it easy for us to do one thing makes it harder to do another.
The short answer is yes. You'll need a different email address, as your results are tied to an email identity.
The longer answer begins with, "Are you older than 25? We see malleability in preferences while our brains and bodies are in development. Our brains reach full physical development by our mid-20's. After that, changes are possible, but our preferences by that point, are durable, and don't easily shift.
Here's what can happen if you take it again.
We're trying to capture your cognitive reflexes. This is more likely when you don't know what to expect. Once you've taken the assessment, it's hard to retake it in that naive state.
What we find when you retake the assessment, is your results trend in the same direction only more so. If you had a centered result, it will tip in one direction or another.
By the way, people who score between the Associative and Sequential are most likely to ask this question.
We also think we know why.
We love statistics, and we've done and continue to do reliability testing.
At the same time, probability theory anticipates outlying data.
First, have you shown it to a someone who knows you well?
If yes and they agree it doesn't fit, please share with us. We're fascinated by things we haven't learned to understand yet. Maybe you'll help us learn it.
We've done longitudinal research including a picture version we've used with pre-readers. We see weak genetic trends -- no reliable conclusions as to why, and see potential for statistically significant changes from birth to roughly age 25. After that, the change doesn't grind to a halt, but develops significant inertia.
We see changes larger than a standard deviation, but rarely. Our retesting is done under conditions of the passage of five years and a fresh set of questions.
The tools for self-understanding developed prior to the 21st century mixed the cognitive -- how we think about things -- with the emotional -- how we feel about things. Even scholastic examinations and aptitude tests, designed to assess cognition, were conducted under time pressure and under conditions not conducive to relaxation and contemplation; thereby, putting the examined under emotional stress.
Why we thought people training to be historians, poets, botanists, and paleontologists, should be selected by their ability to display their skills and knowledge to artificial deadlines seems obtuse at best, and, perhaps because of that obtuseness, resistant to change. We seem to value moving fast and breaking things over consideration in its broadest meaning.
By this point, we are able to separate how we think about things (attention, focus, energy, clarity) from how we feel about them (irritated, excited, introverted, extroverted, happy, motivated, depressed).
No. A selective state suggests that you are interested in the high value, high interest, high utility information.
It gives you a reflexive response for what's strongly signally that it's meaningful, actionable, and useful
The selective preference can make you less distracted by what's of lower importance by alllowing you to focus on the most salient.
And the shadow side of less distracted is less aware. Strengths and weakenesses come from the same place.
Since 1999, OpenBook Learning, now Kairos Cognition, has examined tens of thousands of comprehensive diagnostic, aptitude, and achievement testing results, school and college entrance examination outcomes, psychological and educational evaluations, and other performance data.
We analyzed the data correlated by information solicited across the various measurement tools to identify the strongest predictors of individual behavior.
It's called separating the signal from the noise.
How did we do?
Yes, cognitively diverse teams have broader access to information and richer strategies for decision making. They are less prone to groupthink and recognize a broader range of the opportunities and threats coming toward the organization.
Even when we stand side by side and look in the same direction, we each take a unique sample of the information presented by our surroundings.
Others see things we don’t see.
Others know things we don’t know.
We want to know what they know. It augments our cognitive capital. And, in order to influence others, we need them to understand our views.
Handled naively, this can lead to confusion and conflict as we communicate past each other.
Handled with insight into our different responses, we can build a richer view of the challenges and opportunities in front of us.
Kairos Cognition workshop leaders have spent years engaging their work in the light of their cognitive preferences. They carry this insight to complex teams and groups worldwide.