Functional Contact Index. Forty-two questions on the ordinary functioning of the mind.
The structure derives from psychometric constructs that have already been studied — mindfulness and presence in the FFMQ, cognitive fusion in the CFQ-7, interoception in the MAIA-2, metacognitive insight in the SRIS, psychological flexibility in the MPFI and CompACT. It is a self-assessment: it tells you how you describe yourself, not how you are. That is why it contains calibration checks and is meant to be repeated over time.
The questions are an English rendering of the Italian original. The instrument has not been normed in either language, and the two versions should not yet be treated as interchangeable: if you retest, retest in the same language.
Consider the last 30 days: not the best period of your life, not what you know you could do in theory. Do not think about it too long — the first reasonable assessment is better than a constructed answer.
It is not indicated which scale each question belongs to, nor which ones are reversed: knowing the scoring system would make the test less useful.
Seven independent values — bodily presence, attentional presence, non-identification, insight into automatisms, stability under perturbation, intentional action, epistemic openness — plus an overall index from 0 to 100. The profile of the seven dimensions matters more than the overall number. At the end come a few comparisons built on purpose to look for inconsistencies: recognising your own patterns perfectly well and continuing to be governed by them does not reduce the separation — it is lucidity of a purely intellectual kind.
Higher is better: 0 = minimal contact, 100 = maximal contact. In the Atlas Noctis model what varies is the separation — the distance between the Essence and its manifestation in behaviour — and the index measures how far that distance is reduced. «Functional» is not an ornament: what is detected are the functional conditions of contact — presence, non-identification, holding up, consistency — not contact itself, which no questionnaire can reach. A high score is not an achieved purity: it is an impediment momentarily reduced.
A questionnaire filled in only once easily mistakes a momentary state for a stable characteristic. The ICF-42 reopens after 10 days and compares the sessions: what stays constant is trait, what fluctuates was state. The retest is blind — the previous answers are not shown again before you take it.
The answers stay in the browser of whoever fills them in. No server, no account, no tracking. If you want to send your report to Frater Custos, you do it yourself, at the end, with a button — and only if you want to.
First reasonable assessment, no rereading. If a question seems to cut both ways, answer on how you behave, not on how you would like to behave.
Each dimension is worth 0–24 raw points, shown here on a 0–100 scale. They are independent: they do not add up to a single capacity, and a high value does not compensate for a low value elsewhere. Here too, higher is better. Look at the shape of the profile before the total — the lowest dimensions show where the impediment is greatest, that is, where functioning gives way first.
Comparisons built to look for internal inconsistencies. A finding is not an error: it is a point where the profile says two things that do not usually go together, and which should therefore be read before the scores that produced them.
A questionnaire does not measure functioning: it measures the description you give of it. These three indicators estimate how reliable the description is, and this is the place to start — if they are poor, everything else should be read downwards.
The report contains the sequence of answers and the scores. You can print it, copy it, and keep it for the comparison in ten days' time.
The share button spreads the test, never your result. The report leaves this page only if you are the one who sends it.
This tool is new and has no norms yet: the scores say something about you relative to yourself in ten days' time, not relative to other people. Building those norms takes real reports, with a minimum of context around them. It is not necessary: you already have your report and it is yours. It is only one more help you can give this research, beyond having followed it this far — and for that I thank you.
If you prefer, you can attach a CV instead of writing. It is not needed and changes nothing: do it only if it is easier for you than writing.
I read what you send me and take from it the only thing needed to calibrate the tool: the scores and the context, separated from your name and your address. The original message, any CV and every piece of data that identifies you are deleted within fifteen days of my reading them, and in any case no later than three months after you sent them. I share nothing with anyone, I publish no reports, I build no lists. If you change your mind before then, write to the same address: I delete at once and do not ask you why.
The message leaves from your own mail program. This page transmits nothing on its own, neither now nor ever.