Geopolitical Lens Inventory

A self-assessment of the values, cultural worldview, foreign-policy posture and thinking style that shape how you read a geopolitical event — and of how strongly they shape it.

What this is for

Two people can read an identical set of facts and reach opposite conclusions. Usually that is not because one of them has better information. It is because they are running the facts through different priors about how the world works, and those priors are largely invisible to the person holding them.

This instrument makes yours visible. It takes about 20 minutes, 88 items across six blocks.

Who can see your answers

You can see your own results. In full, whenever you want, and you can export them.
Your employer cannot see your results.Not your answers, not your scores, not your profile. No administrator, manager or owner has any way to retrieve them. There is no code path in this system that returns one person’s results to anybody else.
Your contact details are voluntary. Name, employer, job title and email are optional. If you enter them, the service retains them with your completed report. They are not verified or used for sign-in.
Your organisation sees a combined picture only, and only once at least five people have completed it. Below that, nothing is shown at all.
Your answers are stored on a server. Unlike the standalone version of this instrument, which kept everything in the browser, this one saves your progress as you go so a closed tab does not lose twenty minutes of work. That is a real trade-off and you should know about it before you start.
We retain country only. It is derived from your connection to understand response distribution; the raw IP address is discarded.

This matters for reasons beyond your privacy. If you suspect your answers affect how you are assessed at work, you will answer strategically, and the result will describe a person you are performing rather than the one reading the news. That is worse than useless — for you and for the organisation.

What this is not. It does not measure whether you are right. There is no evidence that reading analysts who share your worldview improves your judgement — the evidence points the other way. The output is designed for lens disclosure and deliberate counter-exposure, not for matching you to a comfortable feed.

Standing methodological caveats

Items are adapted from published instruments (Schwartz PVQ, Kahan cultural worldview, Wittkopf MI/CI, George/Walker operational code, Baron AOT, Kruglanski NFC), not verbatim reproductions. They occupy the same construct space; they are not yet validated against it.
There is no normative sample.Scores are scale-relative, not population-relative. “+1.8” means “toward this pole on this scale,” never “82nd percentile.” Percentile language is deliberately absent until a norming sample exists.
The cultural-worldview block (grid-group) replicates only weakly outside US samples. Treat it as the least portable part of the profile.
The current-affairs module is versioned separately (CA-2026.1) and is designed to be replaced without invalidating core scores.

88 items · ~20 min · progress is saved

Administrators can sign in here to manage the survey.