Reading Virtual Minds Volume I: Science and History, 4th edition

NextStage: Predictive Intelligence, Persuasion Engineering, Interactive Analytics and Behavioral Metrics It’s with great pleasure and a little pride that we announce Reading Virtual Minds Volume I: Science and History, 4th EDITION.

Reading Virtual Minds V1: Science and History, 4th edThat “4th EDITION” part is important. We know lots of people are waiting for Reading Virtual Minds Volume II: Experience and Expectation and it’s next in the queue.

But until then…

Reading Virtual Minds Volume I: Science and History, 4th EDITION is about 100 pages longer than the previous editions and about 10$US cheaper. Why? Because Reading Virtual Minds Volume II: Experience and Expectation is next in the queue.

Some Notes About This Book

I’m actually writing Reading Virtual Minds Volume II: Experience and Expectation right now. In the process of doing that, we realized we needed to add an index to this book. We also wanted to make a full color ebook version available to NextStage Members (it’s a download on the Member welcome page. And if you’re not already a member, what are you waiting for?)

In the process of making a full color version, we realized we’d misplaced some of the original slides and, of course, the charting software had changed since we originally published this volume (same information, different charting system). Also Susan and Jennifer “The Editress” Day wanted the images standardized as much as possible.

We included an Appendix B – Proofs (starting on page 187) for the curious and updated Appendix C – Further Readings (starting on page 236). We migrated a blog used for reference purposes so there may be more or less reference sources and modified some sections with more recent information.

So this edition has a few more pages and a few different pages. It may have an extra quote or two floating around.

You also need to know that Reading Virtual Minds Volume I: Science and History is a “Let’s explore the possibilities” book, not a “How to do it” book. As such, it deals with how NextStage did it (not to mention things that happened along the way). It does not explain how you can do it. This book’s purpose is to open a new territory to you and give you some basic tools for exploration.

There are no magic bullets, quick fixes, simple demonstrations, et cetera, that will turn you into jedis, gurus, kings, queens, samurai, rock stars, mavens, heroes, thought leaders, so on and so forth.

How to Do It starts with Volume II: Experience and Expectation and continues through future volumes in this series. We’ve included a Volume II: Experience and Expectation preview with a How to Do It example on page 302 so you can take a peek if that’s your interest.

That noted, I’m quite sure that you won’t get the full benefit of future volumes without reading this one because unless you’ve read this one you won’t understand the territory you’re exploring in those future volumes.

Reading Virtual Minds V1: Science and History, 4th edThat’s Reading Virtual Minds Volume I: Science and History, 4th EDITION. It’s so good and so good for you! Buy a copy or two today!

Posted in Analytics, Consumer Psychology, Marketing, NextStageology, Predictive, Research, Social, Tools, {C,B/e,M}sTagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Looking for Love? Now You Can Find All the Right Places!
(On the Evolution of Tools)

The NextStage LoveJones ToolI published What Kind of Lover Are You (And Can You Improve)? on That Think You Do and introduced The NextStage LoveJones Tool (NSLJ)1 last Friday (2 Dec 2011).


There’s a bit of history behind that tool, some of which is documented in How Do You Define ‘Love’?. In a nutshell, several years back a personals site asked if we could produce a tool that would determine if people would fall in lust. They called it “love” and when we talked with them at length their greater interest was lust.

Lust — or Erotic love — is immediate, tends to be satisfying due to its extreme psychosensual and endorphin stimulating nature (sex is good exercise in case you didn’t know) and — the best part as far as personals sites are concerned — lustful relationships tend to be temporary. Participants tend to tire of each other quickly because once you get past the magic whumpa whumpa there’s not much holding the relationship together. I should also point out that there’s lots of studies indicating 17-30yos primarily want this kind of relationship (sometimes called “f’ckbuddies”) and an analysis of TXT traffic in this age group bears this out. This generation’s momentary pairings purely for tension release make my generation’s barhopping look lame.

The goal of most personals sites is to have people return frequently to queue up for their next go-round. Long term relationships don’t generate a lot of income for personals sites. Yes, they advertise successful long term pairings because the majority of people frequenting such sites are in a state of “hope”, hence market to that hope.

The reality is that such sites profit when people fall in and out of lust or like and definitely not love. The personals sites’ goals, in other words, is to have people make long term commitments to the site, not to people they’ve met through the site because such sites don’t profit if you find the love of your life, they only profit if you find the love of your night, week or month at best.

Anyway, determining such things was beyond ET’s2 ability at the time. However, developing ET-based tools that determined people’s suitability for each other seemed so doable that we kept returning to it through the years.

aHA! Moments

NextStage OnSite Visitor Analysis ToolEventually we figured it out. We didn’t realize we had figured it out at first. We got our first inkling that the problem was solved when we released our NextStage OnSite3 (NSOS) demo. Normally NextStage OnSite reports on visitor activity en masse. The breakthrough was in isolating and reporting on unique visitors.

aHA!Isolating and reporting on unique visitors wasn’t a breakthrough so much as it was a remembering of how ET was originally purposed; to help individual students better understand course material. That form of ET monitored some highly specific aspects of memory and cognition of individual visitors/students. It was while modifying those ET elements for a specific NSOS client that we had our aHA! moment.

We had lots of data (both our own and from a variety of other researchers) on how the brain maps “love” to specific regions, to what degree, at what levels and so on. All that was necessary on our end was to develop the neuromathematics that translated those neural firings to psychomotor behavioral cues (both gross and fine) and then test test test.

Meanwhile, Back at the Barn…

NextStage SampleMatchWhile this was going on, we released our NextStage SampleMatch Tool4. Whenever we release a new tool we get lots of emails about how that tool could be used, specifically how it could be used in ways we never thought of.

Case in point,

Can your SampleMatch tool show me where I’ll find people I’ll like, maybe even someone to fall in love with? …

Well…that wasn’t what it was designed for, and…hmm…yes, it could.

More accurately, it could give you an idea where you’ll find like-minded people, people you’re most likely to get along with.

So while we were testing testing testing the NextStage LoveJones tool we also realized some it’s outputs could be used as inputs to our SampleMatch tool and, as they say…

…the Quest Was On!

NextStage PersonaScope reveals details about individual thinking patterns, behaviors and motivationsOne of the things NextStage LoveJones determines (although it doesn’t report it) is the user’s RichPersona5. RichPersonae are reported by NextStage PersonaScope (NSPS).

Using myself as a test subject, I ran an earlier version of this post through PersonaScope tool to get an idea of how I was thinking, behaving, responding, what was motivating me and so on. NextStage’s PersonaScope tool indicated that I was a V9 RichPersona (Personality Type). This is also known as an ENTJ in some psych profiling systems.

NextStage's PersonaScope thinks evaluated me as a V9 Personality TypeBut a V9? I know a lot about V9 RichPersona/Personality Types because PersonaScope tool tells me a great deal about such things. Basically, at that moment in time and based on what I’d been doing at that point in time, I wasn’t a pleasant person to be around6. Note: We suggest PersonaScope users prevent one bad piece from dominating an analysis of themselves or others by gathering several pieces together into one file, say some emails or blog posts written over several months, maybe 7-10 total, then put them through PersonaScope.

NextStage's RichPersonae Wheel - Click for larger imageMoving ever onward, the next step was to take a look at NextStage’s RichPersonae Wheel. Not quite a Wheel of Fortune and perhaps close in this case. (Note that the image on the right is a simplified version of our RichPersonae Wheel)

For the purposes of using SampleMatch to find a soul mate, life partner, significant other, special someone, …, the next question is “Do I believe Likes attract or do I believe Opposites attract?”

This question is significant because Likes versus Opposites indicates where you should look on the wheel to determine the RichPersonae of those significant others.

Likes Attract - Click for larger imageLet’s say for our example that you learn you’re an A19 Personality Type and you believe Likes attract. You should look for people with A18, A19 and A20 Rich Personae. People with Rich Personae further and further away from A19 are increasingly less likely to make an A19 personality type happy.

Opposites Attract - Click for larger imageUnless, of course, you believe that opposites attract. Opposites attracting allows our A19 personality type to select from a V6, V7 and V8 personality types.

Therefore the next question in the queue is “Is this user a like or opposite type of person?” That’s actually determined in the RichPersonae. My (at that time) V9 RichPersona was very much an opposites attract type of person. Our A19 example is a likes attract type of person.

The Need to KISS

Possible Attractions - Click for larger imageAt this point we sat back a bit. “Okay, we need the visitor to first use PersonaScope to determine their RichPersona, then they need to know if the response indicates a Like or Opposite personality type, then how to map the response to either a “Likes” or “Opposites” on the RichPersonae Wheel, then what? Are we going to ask them to breakdance on their tablets while singing the Oratorio from Carmen? Backwards? In Spanglish?”

We realized that yes, requiring users/visitors to navigate such a solution path violated our own rules and observations regarding how people use tools (not just ours, everybodies’). The best way to get the largest number of people to use anything is to KISS, the “Keep It Simple, Smeadley” rule that’s on each of our tools as Use: Pure and simple, you login, [either upload a file or enter an URL], click on submit and get your result. Clean, quick, simple and neat because we like it that way.

Eventually we decided that ET could figure all this out and without asking the user any questions at all, simply report back the most likely geographic locations where the user might find compatible life-partners. No questions, only results.

And the Winner Is…

Introducing The NextStage LoveFinderSo we developed The NextStage LoveFinder (NSLF) that automatically performs all the steps outlined above. Literally, all you need to do is login and it determines where on the globe you’re most likely to find compatible life-partners.

So if you notice any mass migrations over the next few years…

And we’re also waiting to see if there are certain places where anyone is most likely to be lucky.

The above, by the way, is how tools evolve here at NextStage; either clients make a request or ask a question and we’re off, or sometimes we just go exploring because we’re researchers and that’s what we like to do.

Currently we’re working on two new tools, one directly requested by a NextStage member and the other hinted at by another NextStage member (although they didn’t know it at the time).

And we continue to improve all our existing tools, too.

Busy us, yes?

True TriQuatro

Beta tests and current use of NextStage LoveJones are indicating that culture plays a great role in how people interact with their partners. Fascinating stuff, this, we thinks!

The NextStage LoveJones Tool1 – The NextStage LoveJones tool measures a bunch of factors and determine what, if anything, the user could do to improve their relationship with their life-partner(s).

2 – If you’re new to this blog or NextStage in general, ET is Evolution Technology, something we designed and developed, now being used in over 70 countries worldwide, and is capable of determining and responding to human thoughts through any human-machine interface.

NextStage OnSite Visitor Analysis Tool3NextStage OnSite is a site visitor analysis tool that provides qualitative and quantitative information about visitors well beyond traditional analytics. OnSite even evaluates bounces and lets you know why visitors bounced. OnSite requires only that a simple JavaScript tag be inserted between the </BODY> and </HTML> tag on each page you want monitored. The basic version consists of thirty reports that determine various psychological (“{C,B/e,M} matrix” or “cognitive, behavioral/effective and motivational”) factors about visitors, all of which provide suggestions for improving site conversion. You can learn more on the NextStage OnSite About page.

NextStage SampleMatch4NextStage SampleMatch (NSSM) analyzes NextStage OnSite data collected worldwide and determines the RichPersonae of geographic regions. Clients use this location specific RichPersonae information to insure their marketing material is designed correctly for the available audience.

NextStage PersonaScope reveals details about individual thinking patterns, behaviors and motivations5 – “RichPersona” is the high level concept of an individual {C,B/e,M} (Cognitive, Behavioral/effective, Motivational) matrix. People are always demonstrating how they think (“Cognitive”), how they act based on how they think (“Behavioral/effective), and how how they think motivates (“Motivational”) them to behave as they do. NextStage currently indices 144 RichPersona for most cultures although that number can be significantly higher for specific audiences (east Asian audiences, for example). NextStage’s PersonaScope (NSPS) tool analyzes material and reports RichPersona in depth.

6 – It’s probably worth knowing that we eat our own dog food here at NextStage, so to speak. I took a moment to determine if I really was demonstrating V9 characteristics and yes, I was. Okay, time to put things down or away and go take care of myself so that I would be a better person to be with for both myself and those around me.

I realized my schedule at the time was somewhat harried and that I was putting demands on myself that were both unnecessary and excessive, nor was it making life much fun for everybody else. I took control back and feel better for it (and I’m told so do those around me).

Next Tool Releases from NextStage

I posted this earlier on LinkedIn and Facebook, now for the general public as well…

NextStage AgePersuader

NSAP reports what age groups will respond best to material and in what percentagesThe next tool out of the gate will be The NextStage AgePersuader (NSAP). NSAP is much like NextStage’s GenderPersuader Tool (NSGP). You give it material to analyze, it indicates what age groups are most likely to respond and in what percentages (NextStage’s GenderPersuader Tool indicates which genders will respond and in what percentages). Like all NextStage tools, NextStage AgePersuader is easy to use (enter your bona fides, enter a file or url to be analyzed, hit [Submit] and get your result) and the results are (we think) easy to understand. NextStage Political Analyzer Tool (NSPA) users are familiar with the NSAP output as age persuasion is part of NSPA’s output.

NextStage GeoScope

NSGS reports what age group percentages, gender percentages and RichPersonae exist in a given geographic locationNextStage GeoScope (NSGS) – NSGS is different from most of the other tools in that it derives data from NextStage’s OnSite Tool (NSOS). Some group members may remember conferences where, during my presentations, I presented charts of how different geographic locations were thinking and responding to online material, and how to design navigation to make use of their thinking/decision making/motivational styles (ala NextStage’s PersonaScope Tool (NSPS and aka the {C,B/e,M} matrix). NSGS will do much the same and will include both an age and gender breakdown of online traffic for a given geographic region.

The home page will present a list of geographic locations ET has learned about via NSOS. Entries can vary from something as specific as “Washington, DC” to something as broad as “Scotland” and are dependent on how much traffic has been analyzed from what geographic locations in a given time period (we’re thinking we’ll update it weekly). If you see a geographic location you’re interested in, enter your bona fides, select a geographic location from the list (that’s the only input you give it). NSGS returns the age breakdown (as in NSAP), gender breakdown (as in NSGP) and top four RichPersonae (as in NSPS) from that geographic area.

NextStage GeoScope pulls data from the NextStage OnSite tool (so it’s pulling data from what’s really out there) and you don’t have to be a NextStage OnSite subscriber to use it. Also this is a tagless tool, meaning you don’t need to tag anything to use it.

We’ve been thinking about this tool for a while and some work I’ve been doing with an international design&marketing firm has solidified the idea and need for this tool. For those who’ve been following us for a while, it’s basically an extension/upgrade of our InFocus Reports. The image above is from an InFocus Report. NSGS will be similar.

NextStage BlueSky-Confidence Gauge

NSBC is the NextStage BlueSky Meter and the NSSA Confidence Gauge in a single reportNextStage BlueSky-Confidence Gauge (NSBC) – NSBC is literally the BlueSky Meter and NSSA’s Confidence Gauge in one tool. We’ve decided to combine these two functions into a separate tool based on the number of people who are using the NextStage Political Analyzer Tool (NSPA) simply to get a combined BS-Confidence result. I was explaining these two elements during a training, that some of the results were indicating “This person is extremely confident what they’re writing is BS”, “This person has absolutely no confidence in what they’re writing, hence they believe it is BS”, … and half the class’s eyes lit up, so a separate tool it’ll be.

NextStage Information Designer

NSID determines the best information layout for a given audience, product/service, delivery platform, output medium and outcome combinationThe last tool in this cycle is NextStage Information Designer (NSID). NSID is very similar to NextStage Ad Placement Tool (NSAD) in that it asks some 30 questions regarding the audience, offering, delivery platform, output medium (brochure, webpage, tri-fold, mobile, kiosk, flyer, …) and desired outcome and determines the best outer (“landing” in web terms) and inner information formats (“pages” in web terms) to use to maximize desired results. This is another tool we’ve been thinking about for a while and some recent work has solidified the necessity of it.

On the horizon:
NextStage Advertising Intelligence (NSAI) – The closest online tool to our full desktop TargetTrack tool (an old, out of date brochure can be seen here. TargetTrack will always be available as part of our consulting packages) we’re finishing up some of the equations, at which point Charles, our CTO, will have his folks turn it into working code.

Charles is also busily at work on an “OnSite Lite” that will only have the three most often used reports and be available at a fraction of the cost of our current OnSite tool (or so he tells me) and handle geometrically higher traffic volumes/site.

And that’s the news from Scotsburn and Nashua.

May it be a happy, busy and profitable Autumn for all of us.


During conversations yesterday I was reminded that NextStage had several free online tools that could easily be converted to our new store system. One of these, InFocus, is mentioned above as the precursor to NextStage GeoScope.

Some of these other tools will be rolled out in our store system over the coming months. Most will be pulling data from our OnSite system (currently monitoring visitor traffic in over 50 countries). Only data allowed by OnSite clients will be used in these tools. These tools will be tagless, meaning you won’t need to tag your site to use them.

These tools include:

  • NextStage Market Persona (NSMP) – NextStage Market Persona will offer a list of markets (travel, medical, educational, automotive, industrial, legal, … for example). Pick the market area of interest to you and NSMP will report the top RichPersonae (what NextStage PersonaScope reports) for that market. Knowing how the majority of people in a market think, make decisions and what motivates them should be useful when developing creative. We think so, anyway…
  • NextStage Predictive Echo (NSPE) – NextStage Predictive Echo is for clients who don’t want OnSite and still want to make use of NextStage’s Evolution Technology in their online efforts. NSPE reads through traffic logs, the web pages the traffic logs involve and determines how to improve site performance regarding messaging, goals, redesign, etc., are concerned.

There are other tools still on our shelves. We’re learning what tools make sense based on how current users are using the existing tool set. Interested folks can also contact us directly should you need a tool you can’t find elsewhere. Chances are we already have it, something quite close or can make it in record time.

NextStage Sentiment Analysis, Beta Test, Phase 2

First my thanks to everyone who took part in the Phase 1 Beta test of NextStage’s Sentiment Analysis (NSSA) Tool. This post covers modifications we made thanks to their comments and follows on Understanding and Using NextStage’s Level 1 Sentiment Analysis Tool.


  • Our developers installed the high-speed data system. Analyses that use to take 10 minutes now take about 60 seconds.
  • We added the Level 2 reports (beta testers will be seeing them in their outputs).
  • Level 2 users will also be able to download a XLS of the results (per Chris Berry’s request).
  • We modified two of the Level 1 reports.

First the newly added Level 2 reports.

Level 2 Reports

Rene suggested using The 10 Must Marketing Messages, Trust, Affinity, Author Rich Persona, Target Rich Persona and Worst Rich Persona.

Author Rich Persona

The Author Rich Persona report lists both the author’s Rich Persona and key elements of their {C,B/e,M} matrix. “{C,B/e,M}” is a shorthand notation for the Cognitive, Behavioral effective, Motivational matrix, a tool that calculates how an individual thinks about, responds to and is driven by any information in their environment. Knowing any individual’s or group’s {C,B/e,M} grants unprecedented knowledge of how to craft a message in order to generate a desired response or propagate a message to that individual or group (I can provide a long bibliography for those interested).

For example, a typical Author Rich Persona report looks like the following:

Author Rich Persona – This report will present the type of RP that has written the text (eg. V3) and a bulleted description of his characteristics.

This material was most likely written by an individual with a V14 Rich Persona. Key features of their {C,B/e,M} include:

  • These people are strongly motivated by what they see
  • They are success oriented
  • Presentations with emotions must be positive in nature
  • They make decisions based on what feels “right”, “correct” or “best”

Lastly, this individual probably falls into the following Myers-Briggs categories:

You can think of The Author RP Report as a kind of Me casa e su casa, meaning that people communicate best with those whose RPs and {C,B/e,M}s are identical to their own. The more identical, the easier the communication and the more easily shared complex cognitive and emotional concepts. Part of my training was learning how to shift my {C,B/e,M} at will to match those of people I was communicating with. Doing so enable me to better understand and respond to them, what is called establishing rapport.

So the above is telling you the author’s {C,B/e,M} casa. They will most effectively communicate with people whose casa is their casa. This is great if their {C,B/e,M} is the same or relatively close to the {C,B/e,M} of the largest possible population segment.

But if it’s not, then the most they can hope to immediately and directly engage is the population segment corresponding to their own {C,B/e,M} casa. They will capture the attention of population segments with {C,B/e,M}s close to their own and how much attention is captured (and then turned into engagement) depends on how psychographically distant the author’s {C,B/e,M} is from reader {C,B/e,M}s.

And before going any further, remember we’re just analyzing the Author’s RP. Including Target and Worst Rich Personae would have expanded that listing some 40 times! And without training?

Desired Intent and PsychoGraphic Desired Intent

Instead we’re offering a variant of some things Chris Berry requested in his original “Boy, if only I could find a Sentiment Analysis tool that did this” list , Desired Intent and Psychographic Desired Intent. Chris’ specific requests were:

click for larger imageWhat I came up with is the chart on the right (and it helps if you know some social mechanics. I can provide a bibliography if you’d like). The leftmost column indicates how much of the best audience will respond as the author desires. The center column indicates how much of the next best audience will get the message and respond. The rightmost column indicates how much of the worst audience will get the message and respond.

The concepts being used in these determinations involve psychological distance. The leftmost column indicates people in the target audience who think the way the author thinks, believes what they believe, learns the way they learn, decides the way they decide, …. all that exact-matching {C,B/e,M} stuff. The middle column can be likened to you listening to someone and responding that you think you agree with them and there’s a few things you need clarification on. The rightmost column can be likened to you listening to someone and disagreeing with them but not knowing why you disagree.

The 10 Must Marketing Messages

click for larger imageThis chart shows the relative intensities of ten messages that must be communicated in all media if the audience is going to positively respond.

I emphasize relative intensities because (my opinion) showing a scale of 0-100% doesn’t indicate how strongly a message was communicated, only that it had a certain intensity when compared to other messages. Normalization (such as scoring 0-100%) is useful in some metrics and not in this on (my opinion again). Someone may be communicating “I Can Help You” at 50points and let’s say that all other messages sum out such that the “I Can Help You” message is 50% of all messages being communicated. The next person is communicating the same message but for a different brand and their message is at 500points. Same other rules as above and it also sums out at 50%, but depending on lots of other factors that second message for the different brand wins because of its intensity, not because of how it normalizes when compared to all other messages. Currently NSSA produces normalized because I was out-voted. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.

Also, I provide more examples of these ten messages in Reading Virtual Minds Vol. 1: Science and History.


click for larger imageTrust (for the purposes of this tool and thanks to Chris Berry) is defined as “the degree of trust between a person (brand) and a social network contained in the message”. What is being calculated is the author’s non-conscious belief that the audience will accept the message. A low score can indicate that the author doesn’t believe the audience will accept the message, that the author believes a small percentage of the audience will accept the message and so on. It doesn’t make much difference with high scores, you’re good any way you look at it.


click for larger imageLevel 2 also includes an Affinity Graph (shown on the right). An author’s affinity to their audience is a measure of how much the author believes they are a member of their audience’s greater community. What’s particularly interesting about this chart is that it should not score high for people who also non-consciously think of themselves as either Influencers or GateKeepers because both functions indicate a non-conscious recognition of being separate (in some way, shape or from) from “the herd”. Author’s who score high as Hubs should score high in Affinity because the function of a Hub is to channel knowledge within a community, hence will have a greater self-concept of being a member of their own audience.

Changes to Level 1

Feedback and observing Level 1 users caused me to rethink some of the information in Level 1 and how it was displayed. The changes are to the Confidence (BS) meter and Message Retention Probability.

Message Retention Probability

click for larger imageThe Message Retention Probability chart originally showed two data points, how much of an audience will remember the message for 3 or so days and how much of an audience will be branded by the exposure.

Rene suggested I expand this to include some other options. What made sense (I’m open to suggestion on this) was a measure of how much of an audience will

  • Understand but Not Remember the message
  • Remember but Not Understand the message
  • Remember for 3 or so days
  • be Basically Branded

Each of the above are rough translations of how much of a message goes into what parts of the brain, long-term (“deep”) memory and cognition. The goal is to have the message lodge in both deep memory and the cognitive centers simultaneously, which is “basically branded”. Note that how large this value is depends a lot on who the intended audience is and how well written something is for that audience.

Suppose what is analyzed shows strongly in “Remember for 3 days or so”. Whatever the message is, it needs to be repeated inside that audience at least once a day for three days in order to shift things to “Basically Branded” (and remember, we’re not monitoring the audience, only the author. The audience would need to see the author’s message three times in three days to internalize the message). An analysis that shows strongly in “Remember but Not Understand” usually indicates that whatever the message is, it needs to be repeated through different channels. Lastly, “Understand but Not Remember” will normally take the lion’s share in any analysis. Note that that audience is not the audience for the message for any of several reasons, it’s simply the largest audience segment out there.

Confidence (BS) Meter

click for larger imageAs you can see, the Confidence (BS) Meter is now horizontal and clearly shows the 0 mark. Visually more informative with much less cognitive effort, I think.

Eating Our Own Dogfood Dept

Just for kicks, I ran the original version of this post through NSSA (sans blog interface, just the content). Can you say Ouch!.
So I went in and made edited. Four versions later, this post is what you get.
The differences are in the numbers:

V0 Version V4 Version

Love Factor

Positive 33.98 0.87
Neutral 1.01 98.76
Negative 65.01 0.36


-72.32 -18.64

Message Retention Probability

Understand But Not Remember 21.46 19.63
Remember But Not Understand 0 0.25
3 Days or so 0 0
Basically Branded 0 0

Message Intent

Referral 22.55 25.81
Retribution 28.96 23.53
Love -1.54 18.3
Constructive 24.09 12.43
Troll 25.93 19.93

Author Influencer Type

Influencer 28.57 62.41
GateKeeper 63.23 37.59
Hub 8.2 0

10 Must Marketing Messages

We Trust You 8.19 10.23
You Can Trust Us 18.21 17.02
This Is Important 2.17 1.26
This Is Important to You 7.16 6.63
We Can Help 9.24 12.12
We Can Help You 24.72 20.86
You Are Good People 8.24 8.41
We Are Good People 7.53 8.86
They Are Not Good People 6.97 5.68
We Are A Leader 7.57 8.92


0 10.00935


0 7.732702

Author Rich Persona

A15 V1

Desired Intent and PsychoGraphic Desired Intent

Desired Intent (First Circle)- A15 71.72 (V1) 29.97
PsychoGraphic Desired Intent (Outer Circle) – A9,A10,A11,A12,A13,A14,A15,A16 4.95 (V2 ,V1 ,V3 ,V4 ,V5 ,V6 ,V7 ,V8) 2.03
PsychoGraphic Desired Intent (Outmost Circle) – K23,A7 ,K7,V23,A15,A23,K15,V7 ,V15 0 (A1 ,A9 ,K1 ,A17,K9 ,K17,V1 ,V9,V17) 0

Major changes through the revisions were removal of massive bibliographies, caveating, general de-sciencing of the content (I can email the V0 post to any insomniacs with a need). Of particular note is the big change in Desired Intent. The First Circle value scored about half the V0 version of this file. Why? Because I was shifting my {C,B/e,M} from an A15 to a V1 {C,B/e,M} (ResearcherJoseph to BusinessBloggerJoseph). This is a tip of the hat to long time editor Brother Brad Berens who’s been telling me to do the same for years now.


Beta testers will once again be turned loose by the time this post goes live.

Enjoy and please let me know your thoughts. Tools evolve through use and interaction, and as I explained in Eight Rules for Good Trainings (Rules 1-3) and Eight Rules for Good Trainings (Rules 4-8), I learn from others more (I’m sure) than they may ever learn from me. Example: One of our beta testers is a fellow in his early 20s. My reasoning for including him? Whatever else he does during the day, his interests are going to be very different from mine. He’ll put material through analysis that I don’t even know exists.

Again, thanks and enjoy.