Results for "How do you understand 'agency'?"

Here we present the results of the questionnaire for exploring how different people understand the meaning of the word "agency". The questionnaire itself is available in English and in Estonian.

Wikipedia says that "agency" is the capacity of an actor to act in a given environment, see the wiki page. The question of agency often comes up when discussing the philosophy of A.I.

However, there is no exact or correct meaning of "agency": our questionnaire tries to understand how do different people give it a more concrete meaning. In other words, what is the "social meaning field" of the word.

Most of this web page was written by Tanel Tammet. At the end of the web page is a detailed analysis conducted by Mohit Vaishnav with the help of his AI-focused analysis pipeline in Github: the final report there was written by the Claude 4.5 model.

Optional filters

Below you can filter the answers by selecting one or more of the answers to the actual questions in the questionnaire.

Clear filters

Background

Year of storing the answer (this was not a question):

You are currently studying at a university:

What is your main subject (either studies or otherwise):

If you are studying at a university, then which year of studies is ongoing:

Have you spent some time (more than 10 minutes) on reading about the philosophical questions of agency:

Questions about what has agency and what not

Only people have agency, but animals or non-living objects do not?

Only living beings have agency, but non-living objects or programs do not?

Only some living beings (say, big animals) have agency, while some (say, plants or amoebas) do not?

Do large organizations of people like companies or states have agency?

Programs may have agency, but non-living physical objects like chairs or computers do not?

Programs may have agency while they are running on the computer?

A computer has agency, regardless of whether it is currently running some specific program or not:

A machine (a non-biological thing which has been made on some purpose) might have agency in the future:

Comparing the "level" of agency of different people

A very rich person has more agency than a poor person?

A very clever person has more agency than a less clever person?

A physically strong person has more agency than a physically weak person?

A person having only a few similar ambitious goals has more agency than a person having many, varied and less ambitious goals?

What has more agency, a meditating and clever super-rich monk living in a cave the whole life without contacting other people, or a poor ordinary person living active life?

Comparing the "level" of agency of non-people

What has more agency, a tornado or a mountain?

What has more agency, a tornado or a grain of sand?

What has more agency, a chess programm using a random number generator in some parts or a chess program functioning without any randomness involved?

What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a world leading chess program?

What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a tornado?

What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a single-cell amoeba?

What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a mouse?

What has more agency, a scalpel used by a doctor or a road walked upon by a traveller?

What has more agency: a volcano that shapes landscapes over millennia or a a beaver that builds dams over its lifetime?

Which qualities are more important for the "level" of agency

Is having goals important for estimating the level of agency:

Is the ambition and effect or size of the goals of agent important for estimating the level of agency:

Is the complexity and the number of available paths to the goal of agent important for estimating the level of agency:

Is being alive important for estimating the level of agency (consider a single cell vs ChatGPT):

Is willing to learn from mistakes important for estimating the level of agency:

Is the speed of action important for estimating the level of agency:

Is intellect important for estimating the level of agency:

Is consciousness important for estimating the level of agency:

Are the physical or social capacities important for estimating the level of agency:

Feedback and additional comments or ideas

You have selected and thought about answers for all the questions?

Correlation matrix

The following is the correlation matrix between all lists of answers: i.e. if somebody answers X to the question Q1, is it likely related to how she answers another question Q2? A low correlation number between Q1 and Q2 means that the answers to Q1 and Q2 are likely independent, while a high correlation number indicates that the answers are likely dependent on each other.

The concrete correlation numbers in the table cells are chi-square numbers. In our case the probability p that two lists of values are dependent, can be estimated from the chi square number: if the chi square number is over 30 (approximately), then the probability that the values are dependent, is over 95%.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
0 27 47 50 0 2 2 3 2 5 3 4 4 4 3 2 2 6 8 2 5 10 14 5 24 2 6 8 2 1 3 3 4 1 4 5 1
1 27 177 266 2 1 2 1 2 4 3 6 4 3 1 3 3 2 1 2 3 7 20 3 2 4 3 2 7 1 8 5 2 2 1 5 1
2 47 177 312 9 3 11 7 15 20 12 14 14 10 9 10 10 18 16 33 25 41 60 24 16 23 39 20 36 24 23 22 28 27 15 23 9
3 50 266 312 59 18 13 14 28 26 22 21 32 18 39 36 20 27 52 37 34 64 62 44 44 42 38 35 36 58 49 37 23 47 31 44 8
4 0 2 9 59 6 9 9 9 6 5 5 4 3 6 4 11 5 4 6 4 7 42 9 4 3 6 12 8 14 6 6 16 16 12 20 11
5 2 1 3 18 6 193 156 21 27 31 24 28 9 11 17 11 15 17 9 14 16 16 19 56 17 74 16 12 12 12 22 27 6 10 11 20
6 2 2 11 13 9 193 210 35 118 115 105 79 14 17 19 24 29 36 42 75 99 87 61 109 44 98 26 11 26 46 25 30 26 61 32 20
7 3 1 7 14 9 156 210 325 175 330 339 204 90 94 97 88 107 166 120 120 170 110 198 164 164 186 26 16 20 18 15 17 16 34 26 93
8 2 2 15 28 9 21 35 325 177 340 333 201 100 88 88 100 94 177 128 144 192 144 177 125 169 121 22 17 28 35 25 22 18 28 32 89
9 5 4 20 26 6 27 118 175 177 352 267 160 50 41 45 46 50 104 88 160 186 146 121 92 116 80 34 21 19 57 17 16 14 46 25 55
10 3 3 12 22 5 31 115 330 340 352 520 251 91 78 81 84 100 209 171 244 302 253 220 166 197 150 33 20 22 67 13 30 21 54 28 89
11 4 6 14 21 5 24 105 339 333 267 520 238 87 78 81 95 91 225 185 190 247 185 206 150 210 155 26 16 23 45 20 19 18 32 25 81
12 4 4 14 32 4 28 79 204 201 160 251 238 55 48 43 46 56 114 93 124 161 127 116 78 121 88 49 10 20 42 30 25 18 40 16 58
13 4 3 10 18 3 9 14 90 100 50 91 87 55 237 344 187 240 60 41 44 72 46 58 43 81 50 21 50 39 10 13 33 19 23 54 49
14 3 1 9 39 6 11 17 94 88 41 78 78 48 237 399 300 346 57 42 40 61 37 53 42 45 33 31 51 62 8 40 64 86 28 67 43
15 2 3 10 36 4 17 19 97 88 45 81 81 43 344 399 304 354 57 35 45 62 42 56 43 72 46 13 45 49 11 18 31 23 27 53 36
16 2 3 10 20 11 11 24 88 100 46 84 95 46 187 300 304 330 59 38 59 58 40 48 34 67 49 12 57 19 11 10 22 26 22 28 36
17 6 2 18 27 5 15 29 107 94 50 100 91 56 240 346 354 330 98 77 51 84 64 59 54 73 50 27 67 45 24 36 50 55 43 38 44
18 8 1 16 52 4 17 36 166 177 104 209 225 114 60 57 57 59 98 307 392 366 373 271 490 320 26 44 35 39 24 51 31 32 28 57
19 2 2 33 37 6 9 42 120 128 88 171 185 93 41 42 35 38 77 229 305 304 276 203 365 271 35 33 31 38 25 55 18 36 27 36
20 5 3 25 34 4 14 75 120 144 160 244 190 124 44 40 45 59 51 307 229 465 326 343 206 298 217 34 33 48 41 23 34 16 59 35 50
21 10 7 41 64 7 16 99 170 192 186 302 247 161 72 61 62 58 84 392 305 465 534 501 369 436 289 35 46 44 52 39 41 39 75 50 56
22 14 20 60 62 42 16 87 110 144 146 253 185 127 46 37 42 40 64 366 304 326 534 418 247 338 265 30 32 28 45 22 36 23 60 31 48
23 5 3 24 44 9 19 61 198 177 121 220 206 116 58 53 56 48 59 373 276 343 501 418 480 372 327 23 26 50 71 33 42 29 69 28 64
24 24 2 16 44 4 56 109 164 125 92 166 150 78 43 42 43 34 54 271 203 206 369 247 480 279 405 52 30 32 43 19 66 38 41 34 38
25 2 4 23 42 3 17 44 164 169 116 197 210 121 81 45 72 67 73 490 365 298 436 338 372 279 408 30 42 21 24 40 39 20 37 22 52
26 6 3 39 38 6 74 98 186 121 80 150 155 88 50 33 46 49 50 320 271 217 289 265 327 405 408 29 20 28 38 42 65 29 35 31 37
27 8 2 20 35 12 16 26 26 22 34 33 26 49 21 31 13 12 27 26 35 34 35 30 23 52 30 29 216 102 28 79 52 100 33 62 24
28 2 7 36 36 8 12 11 16 17 21 20 16 10 50 51 45 57 67 44 33 33 46 32 26 30 42 20 216 191 26 85 89 110 33 120 20
29 1 1 24 58 14 12 26 20 28 19 22 23 20 39 62 49 19 45 35 31 48 44 28 50 32 21 28 102 191 22 96 86 96 26 99 19
30 3 8 23 49 6 12 46 18 35 57 67 45 42 10 8 11 11 24 39 38 41 52 45 71 43 24 38 28 26 22 23 33 24 82 28 10
31 3 5 22 37 6 22 25 15 25 17 13 20 30 13 40 18 10 36 24 25 23 39 22 33 19 40 42 79 85 96 23 96 116 68 82 18
32 4 2 28 23 16 27 30 17 22 16 30 19 25 33 64 31 22 50 51 55 34 41 36 42 66 39 65 52 89 86 33 96 69 38 87 33
33 1 2 27 47 16 6 26 16 18 14 21 18 18 19 86 23 26 55 31 18 16 39 23 29 38 20 29 100 110 96 24 116 69 61 136 25
34 4 1 15 31 12 10 61 34 28 46 54 32 40 23 28 27 22 43 32 36 59 75 60 69 41 37 35 33 33 26 82 68 38 61 57 20
35 5 5 23 44 20 11 32 26 32 25 28 25 16 54 67 53 28 38 28 27 35 50 31 28 34 22 31 62 120 99 28 82 87 136 57 18
36 1 1 9 8 11 20 20 93 89 55 89 81 58 49 43 36 36 44 57 36 50 56 48 64 38 52 37 24 20 19 10 18 33 25 20 18

Rows and columns:

0: Year
1: You are currently studying at a university:
2: What is your main subject (either studies or otherwise):
3: If you are studying at a university, then which year of studies is ongoing:
4: Have you spent some time (more than 10 minutes) on reading about the philosophical questions of agency:
5: Only people have agency, but animals or non-living objects do not?
6: Only living beings have agency, but non-living objects or programs do not?
7: Only some living beings (say, big animals) have agency, while some (say, plants or amoebas) do not?
8: Do large organizations of people like companies or states have agency?
9: Programs may have agency, but non-living physical objects like chairs or computers do not?
10: Programs may have agency while they are running on the computer?
11: A computer has agency, regardless of whether it is currently running some specific program or not:
12: A machine (a non-biological thing which has been made on some purpose) might have agency in the future:
13: A very rich person has more agency than a poor person?
14: A very clever person has more agency than a less clever person?
15: A physically strong person has more agency than a physically weak person?
16: A person having only a few similar ambitious goals has more agency than a person having many, varied and less ambitious goals?
17: What has more agency, a meditating and clever super-rich monk living in a cave the whole life without contacting other people, or a poor ordinary person living active life?
18: What has more agency, a tornado or a mountain?
19: What has more agency, a tornado or a grain of sand?
20: What has more agency, a chess programm using a random number generator in some parts or a chess program functioning without any randomness involved?
21: What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a world leading chess program?
22: What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a tornado?
23: What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a single-cell amoeba?
24: What has more agency, ChatGPT A.I. program or a mouse?
25: What has more agency, a scalpel used by a doctor or a road walked upon by a traveller?
26: What has more agency: a volcano that shapes landscapes over millennia or a a beaver that builds dams over its lifetime?
27: Is having goals important for estimating the level of agency:
28: Is the ambition and effect or size of the goals of agent important for estimating the level of agency:
29: Is the complexity and the number of available paths to the goal of agent important for estimating the level of agency:
30: Is being alive important for estimating the level of agency (consider a single cell vs ChatGPT):
31: Is willing to learn from mistakes important for estimating the level of agency:
32: Is the speed of action important for estimating the level of agency:
33: Is intellect important for estimating the level of agency:
34: Is consciousness important for estimating the level of agency:
35: Are the physical or social capacities important for estimating the level of agency:
36: You have selected and thought about answers for all the questions?

Chi square calculation: LLM to the rescue

The author had really hard time understanding how to use the scipy statistics package to calculate chi squared. After repeated failures and frustration he asked ChatGPT:

"Please write a python program using scipy, which takes two lists of categorical data (short strings) and calculates the chi-square independence between these two lists."

After the first version was produced by ChatGPT, he said

"give a version without pandas"

and the ChatGPT generated the following program, which was used for the table above without any changes: 

from scipy.stats import chi2_contingency

def chi_square_independence(list1, list2):
  """
  Computes the chi-square test of independence for two categorical lists
  without using pandas.
  """

  if len(list1) != len(list2):
      raise ValueError("Both lists must be the same length.")

  # Unique categories
  rows = sorted(set(list1))
  cols = sorted(set(list2))

  # Initialize contingency table
  contingency = [[0 for _ in cols] for _ in rows]

  # Map categories to indices
  row_index = {cat: i for i, cat in enumerate(rows)}
  col_index = {cat: j for j, cat in enumerate(cols)}

  # Count occurrences
  for a, b in zip(list1, list2):
      contingency[row_index[a]][col_index[b]] += 1

  # Perform chi-square test
  chi2, p, dof, expected = chi2_contingency(contingency)

  return chi2, p, dof, expected, rows, cols

A report written by Claude 4.5 at the end of Mohit's analysis pipeline

Agency Survey Data Analysis Report

Date: December 3, 2025
Dataset: 297 survey responses on philosophical agency attitudes
Language: Estonian (95%) and English (5%)

Executive Summary

This report analyzes survey data from 297 respondents (primarily Information Technology students at TalTech) about their beliefs regarding philosophical agency--whether entities like animals, programs, machines, and AI systems can possess agency (the capacity to act intentionally).

Key Findings

  1. Most respondents (79%) believe agency extends beyond humans to animals and other living beings
  2. 77% believe machines could have agency (31% say "already", 46% say "in the future")
  3. ChatGPT is perceived to have more agency than natural phenomena (45% vs tornado) but less than living organisms (42% say amoeba has more, 64% say mouse has more)
  4. Learning (76%) and consciousness (71%) are rated as most important for agency
  5. Two distinct respondent clusters were identified with roughly equal split (56% vs 44%)
  6. No significant temporal drift in attitudes over the data collection period

1. Data Overview

1.1 Dataset Structure

Metric Value
Total Responses 297
Total Questions 40
Missing Values Column 3 only (placeholder)
Time Period Dec 2024 - Nov 2025

1.2 Demographics

1.3 Response Quality

Quality Level Count Percentage
Answered with thought 240 81%
Most questions thoughtfully 48 16%
Some questions thoughtfully 4 1%
Did not think about answers 1 0.3%
Missing 4 1%

Conclusion: 97% of responses are of acceptable quality.

2. Core Agency Beliefs

2.1 Who Has Agency? (Q8)

Response Count Percentage
Animals/objects may also have agency 235 79%
Uncertain 32 11%
Only people have agency 30 10%

Finding: Strong majority rejects human-only agency view.

2.2 Machine Agency Potential (Q15)

Response Count Percentage
Machines might have agency in the future 136 46%
Some machines already have agency 93 31%
Uncertain 36 12%
Machines cannot have agency 30 10%

Finding: 77% are open to machine agency (present or future). Only 10% categorically deny it.

2.3 Programs vs Physical Objects (Q12)

Response Count Percentage
Programs may have agency, physical objects do not 115 39%
Both programs and physical objects may have agency 92 31%
Only living beings have agency 54 18%
Uncertain 34 11%

Finding: Programs are granted agency more readily than inanimate physical objects.

3. AI/ChatGPT Agency Comparisons

3.1 ChatGPT vs Chess Program (Q24)

Response Count Percentage
ChatGPT has more agency 115 39%
Neither has agency 105 35%
Same level of agency 40 13%
Uncertain 19 6%
Chess program has more 16 5%

Finding: ChatGPT perceived to have more agency than deterministic chess programs.

3.2 ChatGPT vs Tornado (Q25)

Response Count Percentage
ChatGPT has more agency 135 46%
Neither has agency 95 32%
Tornado has more 29 10%
Uncertain 23 8%
Same level 12 4%

Finding: ChatGPT clearly perceived as having more agency than natural phenomena.

3.3 ChatGPT vs Amoeba (Q26)

Response Count Percentage
Amoeba has more agency 125 42%
ChatGPT has more agency 77 26%
Neither has agency 46 15%
Uncertain 28 9%
Same level 19 6%

Finding: Living organisms (even single-celled) are often granted more agency than AI.

3.4 ChatGPT vs Mouse (Q27)

Response Count Percentage
Mouse has more agency 190 64%
ChatGPT has more agency 54 18%
Neither has agency 20 7%
Uncertain 16 5%
Same level 14 5%

Finding: Strong consensus that a mammal has more agency than an AI system.

3.5 Agency Hierarchy (Inferred)

Based on comparison questions, respondents implicitly rank agency:

Mouse > Amoeba > ChatGPT > Tornado > Chess Program > Physical Objects

Interpretation: Life appears to be the dominant factor in agency attribution, with cognitive sophistication as secondary.

4. Importance Dimensions for Agency

Respondents rated how important various factors are for having agency:

Factor Very Important Somewhat Important Total Positive
Q34: Learning 140 (47%) 86 (29%) 76%
Q30: Goals 99 (33%) 120 (40%) 74%
Q37: Consciousness 112 (38%) 98 (33%) 71%
Q31: Ambition 62 (21%) 137 (46%) 67%
Q33: Being alive 108 (36%) 79 (27%) 63%
Q36: Intellect 83 (28%) 103 (35%) 63%
Q38: Capacities 63 (21%) 103 (35%) 56%
Q32: Goal complexity 55 (19%) 92 (31%) 49%
Q35: Speed 33 (11%) 72 (24%) 35%

Key Insights:

5. Statistical Analysis

5.1 Chi-Square Dependencies

Top 10 strongest question dependencies (ch² > 300):

Question Pair Chi-Square Interpretation
Q13 <-> Q14 520.3 Programs running vs computer agency
Q17 <-> Q18 398.6 Cleverness vs strength affecting agency
Q12 <-> Q13 351.7 Programs vs objects and running programs
Q16 <-> Q18 343.9 Wealth vs strength affecting agency
Q11 <-> Q13 340.3 Organizations vs programs agency
Q10 <-> Q14 339.4 Living beings vs computer agency
Q11 <-> Q14 332.7 Organizations vs computer agency
Q10 <-> Q13 330.0 Living beings vs programs agency
Q10 <-> Q11 324.7 Living beings vs organizations agency
Q5 <-> Q6 311.5 Subject vs year of study

Interpretation: Questions about program/machine agency form a strongly correlated cluster, suggesting respondents have coherent views on technological agency.

5.2 Cramér's V Analysis

Strongest associations (V > 0.6):

Pair Cramér's V Strength
Q21 <-> Q22 0.729 Very Strong
Q17 <-> Q18 0.669 Strong
Q13 <-> Q14 0.662 Strong
Q18 <-> Q20 0.630 Strong
Q17 <-> Q20 0.623 Strong
Q16 <-> Q18 0.621 Strong
Q24 <-> Q25 0.599 Moderate-Strong

Interpretation: Comparison questions (tornado/mountain, ChatGPT comparisons) show high internal consistency.

5.3 Principal Component Analysis

Component Variance Explained Cumulative
PC1 16.4% 16.4%
PC2 10.2% 26.6%
PC3 6.8% 33.4%
PC4 6.1% 39.5%
PC5 4.9% 44.4%

Top loadings for PC1:

Interpretation: PC1 captures attitudes toward non-living entity agency (natural phenomena, tools, AI). High PC1 scores indicate granting more agency to non-living things.

5.4 K-Means Clustering

Optimal clusters: k = 2 (silhouette score: 0.109)

Cluster Size Percentage
Cluster 0 165 55.6%
Cluster 1 132 44.4%

Interpretation: The low silhouette score (0.109) indicates clusters are not well-separated--respondents don't fall into clearly distinct typologies, but rather form a continuum of views.

5.5 Time Cohort Analysis

No significant differences between early and late respondents:

Question ch² p-value Significant?
Q15 (Machine future) 7.3 0.062 No
Q24 (ChatGPT vs chess) 2.1 0.830 No
Q25 (ChatGPT vs tornado) 3.0 0.557 No
Q26 (ChatGPT vs amoeba) 2.5 0.652 No
Q27 (ChatGPT vs mouse) 7.7 0.103 No

Interpretation: Attitudes remained stable throughout the data collection period (Dec 2024 - Nov 2025).

6. Consistency Analysis

Interpretation: Respondents show highly consistent logical patterns in their answers, validating response quality.

7. Limitations & Issues Identified

7.1 Data Quality Issues

  1. Column 3: Completely empty (placeholder field)
  2. "0" values: Some questions have "0" as an answer (2-4 responses), likely encoding issues
  3. Typo in data: "he chatgpt a.i. program has more" vs "the chatgpt a.i. program has more" (Q24)

7.2 Sampling Limitations

  1. Homogeneous sample: 95% IT students, limiting generalizability
  2. Year bias: 85% first-year students
  3. Language: Primarily Estonian, limiting international comparison

7.3 Analysis Limitations

  1. Typology classification failed: Current logic classified 100% as "Mixed/Uncertain" due to question mapping issues
  2. Subject comparison not possible: Insufficient subjects outside IT for meaningful comparison

8. Generated Visualizations

All graphs saved to graphs/ directory:

Filename Description Findings
basic_missing_values.png Missing values by column Only column 3 has missing data
demographic_language.png Language distribution 95% Estonian
demographic_subjects.png Subject distribution IT dominates
typology_distribution.png Agency typology Needs fixing - all Mixed
ai_agency_attitudes.png ChatGPT comparison responses Clear patterns visible
consistency_distribution.png Consistency scores High overall consistency
chi_square_heatmap.png Question dependencies Clustered structure visible
cramers_v_heatmap.png Cramér's V correlations Strong Q21-22, Q24-27 blocks
pca_analysis.png PCA scree and scatter Gradual variance decline
kmeans_elbow_silhouette.png Cluster optimization k=2 optimal but weak
kmeans_clusters_pca.png Cluster visualization Overlapping clusters
time_cohort_analysis.png Temporal patterns Stable attitudes
importance_distributions.png Importance ratings Learning most important

9. Conclusions

9.1 Philosophical Implications

  1. Agency is not human-exclusive: The vast majority (79%) believe agency extends to animals and potentially other entities.

  2. Life matters for agency: Living organisms consistently outrank AI systems in perceived agency, even at the cellular level.

  3. AI is granted conditional agency: ChatGPT is perceived to have more agency than natural phenomena (tornado) and tools (chess program), but less than any living organism.

  4. Learning is the key factor: The ability to learn is rated as the most important factor for agency, potentially explaining why AI (which learns) is granted more agency than deterministic systems.

  5. Consciousness creates the gap: The high importance of consciousness (71% positive) explains why biological entities are granted more agency than AI.

9.2 Practical Implications

  1. AI perception is nuanced: Users don't simply accept or reject AI agency--they make sophisticated comparisons.

  2. Future acceptance likely: With 77% open to machine agency, acceptance may grow as AI capabilities increase.

  3. Biological benchmark persists: Any AI system will be compared against biological entities, and the "life" factor presents a persistent gap.

9.3 Recommendations for Future Research

  1. Diversify sample: Include non-IT students and non-students
  2. Fix typology classification: Update algorithm to match actual data values
  3. Longitudinal tracking: Follow same respondents over time to detect attitude changes
  4. Cross-cultural comparison: Collect data in multiple languages/countries

Appendix: Column-Question Mapping

Column Content
0 Response ID
1 Timestamp
2 Language (est/eng)
3 Empty placeholder
4 University student (yes/no)
5 Subject area
6 Year of study
7 Read about philosophical agency
8 Only people have agency?
9 Non-living/programs may have agency?
10 Which living beings have agency?
11 Organizations have agency?
12 Programs vs physical objects
13 Programs agency while running
14 Computer agency
15 Machines future agency
16-18 Wealth/cleverness/strength affecting agency
19-20 Goals/lifestyle comparisons
21-22 Tornado vs mountain/grain
23 Random vs deterministic chess
24-27 ChatGPT comparisons
28-29 Scalpel/volcano comparisons
30-38 Importance ratings
39 Response quality self-assessment

Report generated by automated analysis pipeline.

---