Sample User's Brain Profile

A high inattentive score indicates persistent difficulty sustaining attention on non-preferred tasks, frequent mind-wandering during conversations or reading, difficulty following multi-step instructions without external anchors, and a tendency to lose items or miss details. At 65%, this is among the stronger contributors to your overall profile. The pattern is consistent with the inattentive presentation of ADHD rather than simple distractibility.

A significant hyperactive-impulsive score in adults often presents as internal restlessness, difficulty waiting, impulsive verbal contributions, and a tendency to act before fully thinking through consequences. At 50%, this is a meaningful contributor — particularly the impulsivity dimension — though it does not dominate your profile. Combined with your inattentive score, this places you in combined presentation territory.

This is your second-highest subscale score. It reflects the degree to which your engagement and performance are governed by interest, novelty, and challenge rather than by importance, obligation, or proximity to deadline. At 66%, the interest-motivation system is a dominant feature of your cognitive style — producing both the capacity for deep, driven work on engaging tasks and significant difficulty initiating or sustaining effort on routine tasks.

This subscale captures the downstream impact of executive function difficulties — planning, prioritisation, task management, and working memory load. At 56%, the impact is significant, suggesting that the executive challenges associated with your inattentive pattern are creating measurable difficulty in daily functioning across work, domestic life, and long-term planning.

Emotional dysregulation in ADHD refers to difficulty modulating the intensity of emotional responses — not the emotions themselves, but the speed of onset, the peak intensity, and the recovery time. At 44% (elevated), your responses suggest this is a meaningful but not dominant feature. Emotional flooding, frustration intolerance, and difficulty recovering from interpersonal friction are likely recognisable patterns.

Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria (RSD) is increasingly recognised as a core ADHD feature. At 53% (significant), your responses suggest that the anticipation or perception of rejection, criticism, or disapproval triggers a disproportionate emotional response — one that can feel overwhelming in the moment even when you know rationally that it is outsized. This score, in conjunction with your emotional dysregulation score, suggests a reinforcing loop worth understanding in depth.

Masking refers to the learned effort of concealing, compensating for, or suppressing ADHD-related behaviours — often developed in response to social pressure, school environments, or internalised expectations. At 63% (significant), this is one of the most important features of your profile. High masking scores in the context of other elevated scores strongly suggest that visible functional impairment understates the underlying trait burden.

This subscale measures the self-reported impact of ADHD-patterned traits on daily functioning — work, relationships, domestic life, and personal goals. At 47% (elevated), the impact is meaningful but does not dominate the profile. The gap between this score and your masking score is informative: the compensatory strategies captured in C1 appear to be moderating some functional impairment, but at a personal cost.

The strength profile captures dimensions that research associates with ADHD-patterned cognition: hyperfocus capacity, creative thinking, divergent problem-solving, risk tolerance, and social pattern recognition. At 70% — your highest subscale score — there is a strong and consistent strength signature. This is not a consolation prize; it reflects genuine cognitive assets that are neurologically linked to the same trait architecture that creates the challenges elsewhere in your profile.

Core Sensitivity measures the baseline perceptual sensitivity to rejection-related signals — the degree to which your nervous system is primed to detect potential criticism, disapproval, or exclusion. At 70% (significant), this is your highest subscale score and the foundation of your RSD profile. High core sensitivity does not mean you are wrong about what you perceive; it means the detection threshold is lower and the perceived signals are more salient and emotionally charged than they would be for most people.

Anticipatory anxiety captures the prospective dimension of rejection sensitivity — the degree to which concern about potential rejection shapes behaviour before an event occurs. At 61% (elevated), your responses suggest meaningful avoidance of situations where rejection is possible, pre-emptive self-monitoring to reduce rejection risk, and significant energy invested in predicting how others will respond. This forward-looking anxiety often drives the people-pleasing, perfectionism, and social withdrawal that can accompany significant RSD.

This subscale examines how rejection sensitivity shapes the texture of your relationships — the degree to which fear of rejection influences how you communicate, set expectations, handle conflict, and maintain closeness. At 50% (elevated), rejection sensitivity is visibly shaping interpersonal behaviour: you may hold back opinions, avoid conflict disproportionately, seek reassurance more than you would prefer, or pre-emptively withdraw from relationships that feel uncertain.

This subscale examines the impact of rejection sensitivity in professional and achievement contexts — how criticism, performance feedback, and competitive comparison affect your functioning at work or in goal-directed activity. At 39% (elevated), the impact is present but not your most prominent dimension. You may find critical feedback disproportionately difficult to process even when you understand it is well-intentioned, or notice that the possibility of public failure has a chilling effect on risk-taking and creative output.

Recovery & Processing is your second-highest score and the dimension that gives your profile its 'slow-burn' character. At 69% (significant), it indicates that the emotional aftermath of perceived rejection events is prolonged — the dysphoric state does not clear quickly, and in the intervening period it continues to influence mood, decision-making, and motivation. Many people with this recovery pattern describe it as being 'pulled back' to the triggering event repeatedly, even when they have consciously decided to move on.

RSD Masking captures the degree to which you actively conceal your rejection sensitivity responses from others. At 63% (elevated), there is significant masking behaviour: suppressing visible distress in the moment, performing composure after rejection events, and reframing your responses to appear more resilient than you feel. This is a significant cognitive and emotional load, and it often means that the people closest to you have incomplete information about how these patterns affect you — which in turn can make it harder to receive appropriate support.

Task Initiation measures the difficulty of beginning tasks — particularly tasks that lack immediate reward, urgency, or interest. At 71% (significant), this is among your highest scores. It captures the experience of 'knowing what to do but not being able to start' — the paralysis at the threshold of action that is distinct from not knowing how to proceed. This is not a motivation problem in the ordinary sense; it reflects a specific executive function bottleneck at the point of transition from intention to action.

Working Memory measures the functional capacity to hold and manipulate information in mind while doing something else. At 58% (significant), your responses describe meaningful difficulty keeping track of multi-step processes, following lengthy instructions, holding a thought while attending to something else, and maintaining context across interruptions. Working memory difficulty has a multiplier effect — it increases the cognitive cost of almost every other task.

Planning & Sequencing captures the difficulty of organising steps into a coherent order, anticipating what will be needed, and maintaining the plan across the execution of a complex task. At 50% (significant), there is meaningful impairment — particularly in multi-stage projects or situations where the order of steps matters and the consequences of misordering are significant. This often presents as an inability to 'see the whole picture' or difficulty knowing where to start a complex task even when the goal is clear.

Time Processing is your highest subscale score at 75% (significant). It reflects both the subjective experience of time (how time feels as it passes) and the practical ability to estimate, allocate, and track time in task contexts. Time blindness at this level typically manifests as chronic underestimation of how long tasks take, a collapse of temporal urgency for anything that is not immediately imminent, and a subjective sense that time passes in an inconsistent, non-linear way. It is among the most functionally impairing executive features because it cascades into almost every other domain.

Cognitive Flexibility measures the ease of shifting between tasks, approaches, or mental sets — particularly when a preferred approach is not working. At 38% (elevated), there is some difficulty, particularly around transitions between tasks and the resistance to changing a plan once formed. However, this is your lowest score and a relative strength in your profile — suggesting that cognitive rigidity is not a dominant feature of your executive challenges.

Emotional Initiation Cost captures the emotional weight that accumulates before a task begins — the anxiety, dread, overwhelm, or shame that many people with executive function difficulties experience in the anticipatory phase of difficult tasks. At 67% (significant), this is your second-highest score and a critical feature of your profile. When combined with high task initiation difficulty, it means that starting is both attentionally hard and emotionally costly — a compound barrier that standard accounts of 'procrastination' dramatically underestimate.

Decision Fatigue measures the depletion of decision-making capacity across a day or under cognitive load. At 54% (significant), your responses suggest that sequential decision-making is significantly more depleting for you than for most people, and that later-in-day or high-load decisions are qualitatively worse than early or low-load ones. This has practical implications: high-stakes decisions made under cognitive depletion are likely to be worse than the same decisions made at a lower-load time.

Context-Dependent Performance captures the degree to which your executive function varies with environmental conditions — the gap between what you can do in optimal conditions versus constrained ones. At 46% (elevated), there is meaningful variability: your performance in high-interest, structured, or low-distraction contexts may be substantially better than your performance under pressure, fatigue, or noise. This variability can lead to being significantly underestimated by others who have only observed you in suboptimal conditions.

Cognitive Stamina measures the sustainability of effortful cognitive work — how long you can maintain high-quality executive processing before significant depletion. At 63% (significant), your profile suggests meaningful stamina challenges: you may be able to sustain high-quality focused work for shorter periods than peers, and recovery time between high-demand tasks is likely longer. This is distinct from intellectual capacity — it is a stamina issue, not a capability issue.

External Scaffolding Dependence measures how much you rely on external structures, reminders, systems, and environmental cues to maintain executive function. At 42% (elevated), your responses suggest a meaningful but not extreme reliance on external scaffolding. This is not a weakness; it is an accurate self-assessment of what works for your brain. The question is not whether to use external scaffolding, but which forms are most efficient and least friction-heavy for your specific profile.

Transition Cost measures the cognitive and emotional expense of moving between tasks, contexts, or mental states. At 58% (significant), your responses describe meaningful difficulty with mid-task interruptions, switching from deep work to administrative tasks, and the re-entry cost of returning to a task after a break. High transition cost often leads to a preference for completing tasks in uninterrupted blocks — but it also means that interruption-heavy environments are significantly more depleting than they would be for others.

Note: This subscale is reverse-scored. A low percentage score indicates strong metacognitive awareness, not impairment. At 25%, your score reflects a well-developed capacity to observe, describe, and reason about your own cognitive patterns. You are likely able to recognise when you are reaching cognitive capacity, identify which conditions support or undermine your executive function, and adjust your approach accordingly. This self-knowledge is the most portable and transferable executive resource you have.