About Testy
A research publication that happens to run tests
Tests that tell you something you did not already know. That is the entire product thesis, and most of what follows is an explanation of what it costs us to mean it.
The category has a credibility problem, and it earned it
Online self-assessment is a large and largely disreputable business. The standard model is a quiz built to feel personal rather than to measure anything, a result written so that nobody could possibly disagree with it, and a subscription whose renewal terms are the only part of the page set in small type.
It works, in the narrow sense that it takes money. It also produces the review pages those companies have, where the most common word is “hidden”, and the dispute rates that eventually end the arrangement with their payment processor. The model is not just unpleasant; it is structurally short-lived.
We think the interesting question is whether you can build the same thing honestly — a genuinely engaging five-minute test, a result people want to share, a paid report worth buying — with the scoring published, the limitations stated and the renewal date on the front of the card. Not as an ethical posture. As the version that is still operating in three years.
The thing that makes it possible is that an accurate result is more interesting than a flattering one. Being told a label fits you 68% is a better experience than being told you are a rare and remarkable type, because you can feel which one is true.
In short
- What we make
- Short, principle-level self-assessments with published scoring.
- What it is for
- Self-knowledge and entertainment. Not diagnosis, not advice, not advocacy.
- How it is paid for
- The test and your axis positions are free. The full written report is part of a plan, starting at $1.95.
- Who it is by
- A small team working across psychometrics, editorial and product. Named bylines go up when the first external reviewer has signed off on the item bank.
How we work
Four commitments that each cost us something
Principles that cost nothing are decoration. These are the ones with a price attached, and the price is roughly what you would expect: a lower conversion rate in exchange for a product that survives contact with its own reviews.
Publish the scoring, always
Every instrument ships with its rules visible: what each axis measures, which statements are reversed, how a click becomes a number. A method you cannot inspect is a claim, not a method — and a paid report resting on an unreadable claim is not something we would want to sell.
Say what the test cannot do
Our methodology page carries a list of things the test genuinely cannot establish, including some that would be commercially convenient to leave vague. Overstating the instrument is the fastest way to make the whole thing worthless.
Describe, never prescribe
We tell you where you stand. We never tell you what to do about it, and nothing on this site names a party, a candidate, a campaign or an election. That is not caution about controversy — it is what keeps the measurement about you rather than about the news cycle.
State the price next to the button
What you are charged now, what you are charged later, when the next charge lands and how to stop it, in readable type adjacent to the thing you are about to click. One trial length, one renewal figure, identical everywhere on the site.
Things you will not find on this site
Every item on this list is a standard, effective tactic in this category. Each one reliably lifts a conversion rate. Each one also converts a customer into a person who later disputes the charge, which is a worse outcome for everyone including us.
See the pricing page- No countdown timer that resets when you reload the page.
- No invented stock counts, viewer counts or review totals.
- No pre-ticked boxes and no plan selected on your behalf.
- No renewal terms hidden behind a link or set in grey six-point type.
- No cancellation flow designed to outlast your patience.
- No result that tells you how to vote, register or give money.
Editorial
What we write about, and what we leave alone
The insights archive covers how these instruments are built, why the models disagree with each other, and the specific ways people misread a result about themselves. It is written to still be correct in three years, which rules out anything pegged to a current dispute.
What we leave alone: which positions are right. We have opinions; they are not the product, and a measurement instrument that argues with your result has stopped being a measurement instrument.
Contact
If something here is wrong
A scoring rule that does not hold up, an item that reads as loaded, two numbers on the site that disagree with each other — all of these are worth an email. The methodology is public specifically so that it can be argued with.
The practical version
All of this only matters if the test is any good.
Five minutes, thirty-six statements, four axes and a result that shows you its own margin of error. Judge the argument by the output.
Free to take. No account needed to see where you land.